|
Chicago-St. Louis Breakdown And Prediction |
|
|
|
|
|
Forget the post-mortems on the regular season—much less a wonky OT loss in Columbus last night with most of the Hawks’ core players not on the ice.
It’s time to talk about the playoffs, more specifically, the first round against the St. Louis Blues.
I’m going to be as objective as I can be, and generally, you can go back through the blog archives for my record on series predictions and breakdowns. (Cursory tabulation: 14-2 since my first in 2009, correct on number of games 6 times).
I have serious doubts about how deep this Hawk team can go in the playoffs. I will revisit the longer term prognosis after this round—if the Hawks are still alive.
As for the Blues.
I am (and have been) of the opinion that head-to-head records and trends in the regular season matter in playoff series—especially versus a divisional foe—where you have a larger sample size. I’ve seen regular season trends play out in playoff series countless times. And chances are they will in this series.
The other issue is where the two teams are at today—next week—in terms of health and psychology.
In the season series, the Blackhawks won 2 games in regulation, lost 2 in overtime, and one in the shootout. This is important, because 5-on-5 play matters a lot more in the playoffs. Forget about 3-on-3 and the shootout.
Another telling stat: the Hawks outshot the Blues over 5 games, while they were underwater in shot differential versus every other Central team except Winnipeg.
As Hawk fans who read here regularly can attest: I have maintained all season that the Achilles Heel of this Hawk club has been 5-on-5 play, and shot differential.
The season series of 5 games suggests this is not a problem for the Hawks versus the St. Louis Blues. 5-on-5 versus the Blues, the Hawks have outscored St. Louis 10-6. They outshot the Blues 155-150 overall, not statistically significant, but not underwater either.
Conversely, in the playoffs, faceoffs become more important. And the Hawks were 52% versus the Blues, a margin that verges on statistical significance in the playoffs especially.
Where this series becomes harder to assess is on special teams, where the Blackhawks possess the league’s 2nd ranked power play and the Blues, the 6th ranked. The Hawks were 4-17 on the power play vs. the Blues. St. Louis, a scary 4-14 versus Chicago.
And you can’t look at the power play without looking at penalty kill numbers. The Blues are third in the league in the regular season, the Blackhawks 21st. Obvious advantage St. Louis? Ehhhhh . . . maybe? Before the Hawks’ best penalty-killing forward, Marcus Kruger, went down with injury at midseason, the Hawk penalty kill was ranked 10th in the league. Since Kruger returned to the ice a handful of games ago, the Hawk power play has improved fairly dramatically.
A concern here for Chicago is the health of their second best penalty killing forward, Marian Hossa—and really overall health for both teams is where this series could turn.
For the Hawks, health is a concern for Corey Crawford, Hossa, Andrew Shaw and Artem Anisimov. Big names, big questions. For the Blues, injuries are almost as significant: Jake Allen, David Backes, and Robby Fabbri.
First the Hawks—the information I have, which quite frankly is not all that more detailed than anyone else’s in this regard, NHL injury “reports” being what they are, is Anisimov should be fine for Game 1. Hossa will play although he has been playing through a knee injury for several games.
Shaw is a big questionmark. Joel Quenneville has said Shaw will play Game 1. The exact nature of his injury is unknown but it has been rumored his is the worst of the injuries to the four players.
Crawford. Hmmm. Yes. Crawford.
I sat about 90 feet from Crawford for two periods last night. I don’t think he is 100%. His health may be ok, may be, but his game isn’t quite there. First game back after extended injury, perhaps that’s to be expected.
The question is if Crawford’s health is quite good enough for his game to subsequently round into shape. At least 3 Columbus goals were pretty fluky or significant redirects. Crawford mostly held his crease well, no spectacular saves, hard to tell how his reactions were. Bright side, Crawford looked about as good as Scott Darling was in his absence. And we know Darling can come in and win an early playoff round. It is what it is.
Another factor: Duncan Keith is out (suspension) for Game 1. If the Hawks want to steal one in St. Louis next week, the task is a bit harder without #2.
I can’t speak to St. Louis’ injuries: Backes says he’s ready to play. I found nothing on Allen’s injury. His backup, Brian Elliott, was shelled (and pulled) last night in a home loss to Washington that was an important game to the Blues. Fabbri played last night and was -3. Elliott is in my opinion, a goalie who can get hot and steal games. He’s a lot like former Hawk netminders Antti Niemi and Craig Anderson—but probably not as good as either—feast or famine. We’ll see which the Hawks get—if Allen can’t play.
The injury situation frankly seems like a push, which leads me next to psychology.
Rightly or wrongly, Quenneville has played the last handful of games looking toward the playoffs—not playing a lot of key players—instead of playing them and hoping to work through a late season funk.
The Hawks’ organizational mentality seems to be that it will all work itself out come playoff time. Well, no other NHL team is in a better position to say that based on past history.
As much as this season has been a struggle to adapt to offseason turnover and turmoil, the Blackhawks are a team that find ways to win when it matters. They know this. The Blues know this. It’s always the same with the Hawks and the Blues, Wild or Predators. Until one of those teams knocks the Hawks off in a playoff series, the Blackhawks have the psychological advantage. Period.
That could change this year. The Blackhawks are “ripe for the picking” and the Blues are a year older and ostensibly more mature. But until it changes, the Hawks have the champion’s mentality and psychology.
As far as matchups, I’ve touched on the special teams. And I think the series could hinge on them.
5-on-5, I think the Hawks have a slight advantage because they boast two very potent lines. Assuming Hossa is about where he was before the latest tweak to his knee, he, Jonathan Toews and Andrew Ladd are going to put a lot of pressure on the Blues’ second pair—possibly Kevin Shattenkirk and either Colton Parayko or Joel Edmundson. Because Ken Hitchcock will have to put his best defenders (Alex Pietrangelo and Jay Bouwmeester) out against Artemi Panarin, Patrick Kane and Anisimov—the league’s best line.
Like so many playoff series between good teams, you almost always default to which teams’ lower lines play better. But so often, the lower lines and pairings are used more situationally in the playoffs—and the outcome hinges on whose stars shine.
Kane and Panarin are going to get some points. It’s probably just a question of when and how much. For the Toews’ line, the game will be a lot of cycling down low and looking for opportunities in transition.
The Blues have a lot of very good, if not great, forwards. I just don’t think over a 7-game series, they present the same challenges for Quenneville to match up defensively as Hitchcock is presented with. Again, Hossa’s relative health, and to a degree Shaw’s, are critical to this calculus.
Key players for Chicago—and I mean key in they need to be as good or better than they have been recently:
Teuvo Teravainen
Tomas Fleischmann
Trevor van Riemsdyk
Fleischmann was -4 last night versus Columbus. He shows flashes at times of being an offensive weapon and he can kill penalties. He just needs to be more consistent—and consistently more productive. Fleischmann and Teravainen will form the Hawks’ third line, along with Dale Weise. This line is critical to the Hawks’ chances. If these guys can come together and give the Hawks some offensive production without hurting them defensively, the Hawks are going to be very, very hard to stop.
Teravainen is a work in progress. He is an elite passer and very smart and responsible defensively, but his game without the puck relies entirely on positioning and his stick—and he can be intimidated out of physical games. The Blues, like 29 other NHL teams know this. TT can expect a steady diet of elbows and cross-checks (that won’t be called). The St. Louis series will be physical. The Hawks need him to step up. If the Blues render him a floating non-factor, which is their plan, it hurts the Hawks’ chances considerably.
Van Riemsdyk essentially replaces Johnny Oduya as the Hawks’ #4 defenseman. Barring injury, the TOI pressure should be reduced on the top 4 this year versus last. But van Riemsdyk is not Oduya’s equal as a defender over 200 feet of ice. That said, he ain’t bad either. He has improved and he will get better. The next two weeks would be a very good time for that improvement to continue or even accelerate.
In the end, my prediction is this, either the Toews line or the Kane/Panarin line is going to ultimately break out—and win this series for Chicago in 7 mostly low-scoring games.
All I have for now. I went through and played with a lot of numbers for this blog, if I'm off here or there by a tick or two, my apologies.
I expect robust discussion on this from fans of both teams (and others). Everyone please play nice and respectfully.
JJ
FOB
(good peeps, good reads)
Chris Block
Al Cimaglia
http://www.thethirdmanin.com
Frank Nova
http://www.hockeenight.com
Greg Boysen
http://www.letsgohawks.net
Puckin’ Hostile Crew
http://www.puckinhostile.com
Chicago Blackhawks Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»