The problem is that's only 22 goals in 15 games, not good.
- walleyeb1

I know a lot of people have been concerned about the Hawks' 5v5 play, but their scoring chance percentage at ev is 4th in the league at 52.3%. With their PDO being sub 99%, there should be plenty of regression up as the season progresses, and that means goals at even strength should come. Not guaranteed, but statistically likely.

I know a lot of people have been concerned about the Hawks' 5v5 play, but their scoring chance percentage at ev is 4th in the league at 52.3%. With their PDO being sub 99%, there should be plenty of regression up as the season progresses, and that means goals at even strength should come. Not guaranteed, but statistically likely.
- L_B_R

Great point, LBR. Always a good thing to read your voice of reason........ Assuming the Hawks find the average of 100, and they don't have a statistical 1 year anomaly, the law of averages dictates the Hawks will score more 5 on 5 as the season goes on. Especially when taking into account they rank 10th in Corsi.

http://www.puckalytics.com/teamstats.html

JJ, you nicely lay out the reasons why a 1LW would cure many ills the greatest for me being is that one add (1LW) would strengthen the bottom 2 lines. One helluva domino effect. But what I haven't read in this thread, unless I missed it, is that most have agreed that adding an effective 4th Dman in house is much easier/probable than an effective 1LW. Meaning it would seem StanBowPops&McD have probably prioritize acquiring a 1LW over any other position.

I know a lot of people have been concerned about the Hawks' 5v5 play, but their scoring chance percentage at ev is 4th in the league at 52.3%. With their PDO being sub 99%, there should be plenty of regression up as the season progresses, and that means goals at even strength should come. Not guaranteed, but statistically likely.
- L_B_R

Should. We'll see. The 5-on-5 discrepancy is real and it's a direct result of what's happening (and isn't happening) on the ice. It's also something therefore to be concerned about.

An encouraging sign as someone pointed out earlier is the scoring distribution has been more even of late.

I am also slightly encouraged by how they played in Colorado. They had a lot of pace coming out of their zone and up the ice against a fast team, a lot of chances from transition.

JJ, you nicely lay out the reasons why a 1LW would cure many ills the greatest for me being is that one add (1LW) would strengthen the bottom 2 lines. One helluva domino effect. But what I haven't read in this thread, unless I missed it, is that most have agreed that adding an effective 4th Dman in house is much easier/probable than an effective 1LW. Meaning it would seem StanBowPops&McD have probably prioritize acquiring a 1LW over any other position.
- Mr Ricochet

Not exactly. What I said earlier Rico is that going out and getting a 4D basically acknowledges what most people see—that TVR is probably best suited to be a very good #5 for you. OK.

But, to be fair to TVR, a "#4" is probably just marginally better than he is. So how much do you want to pay for that? And how much better does it make the defense over all if the "domino effect" we talked about earlier is just pushing Gusto into the press box

So I know I'm preaching to the choir at this point, but just to underscore the argument again, if you can add a guy who is a natural (or more natural in the case of say Boedker) left winger with enough skill to complement Toews and Hossa, and that line can become the threat (or close to it) it was last year, then you help that line score, improve the "fourth" line immensely by allowing Shaw to flop down to RW on that line, AND you improve your overall defense because the "first" and "fourth" lines will be a lot stronger inoffensive zone possession—just like they were so successfully last year with the proper personnel.

Not exactly. What I said earlier Rico is that going out and getting a 4D basically acknowledges what most people see—that TVR is probably best suited to be a very good #5 for you. OK.

But, to be fair to TVR, a "#4" is probably just marginally better than he is. So how much do you want to pay for that? And how much better does it make the defense over all if the "domino effect" we talked about earlier is just pushing Gusto into the press box


- John Jaeckel

My thought, and I thought (did I misread?) yours too from recent posts, was that fixing one of the two most pressing needs, 4th Dman or 1LW, was that 4D was easier done in house. Especially when taking into account the domino effect that would cause for the 3rd and 4th lines.

I think Gustafsson is gonna add another variable into managements thoughts as they see how well he does, IE can he fill that slot enough to not be a detriment?

Not exactly. What I said earlier Rico is that going out and getting a 4D basically acknowledges what most people see—that TVR is probably best suited to be a very good #5 for you. OK.

But, to be fair to TVR, a "#4" is probably just marginally better than he is. So how much do you want to pay for that? And how much better does it make the defense over all if the "domino effect" we talked about earlier is just pushing Gusto into the press box

So I know I'm preaching to the choir at this point, but just to underscore the argument again, if you can add a guy who is a natural (or more natural in the case of say Boedker) left winger with enough skill to complement Toews and Hossa, and that line can become the threat (or close to it) it was last year, then you help that line score, improve the "fourth" line immensely by allowing Shaw to flop down to RW on that line, AND you improve your overall defense because the "first" and "fourth" lines will be a lot stronger inoffensive zone possession—just like they were so successfully last year with the proper personnel.
- John Jaeckel

If this is in fact true, which I think it probably is, does it make any sense to focus on getting a player who is in the 5 and 6 range and not giving up that much. Someone who you would say is as good as TVR, but more experience?

That way you're not giving up as much, and you can focus on the LW. Also, you are not beholden to Rozy or Scuds come playoff time

Great point, LBR. Always a good thing to read your voice of reason........ Assuming the Hawks find the average of 100, and they don't have a statistical 1 year anomaly, the law of averages dictates the Hawks will score more 5 on 5 as the season goes on. Especially when taking into account they rank 10th in Corsi.


- Mr Ricochet

WOI has their possession a little higher, but yes, they're top 10 in all possession stats in all situations, including close and score adjusted. Those numbers are down from last year, but that's to be expected with so much personnel movement and they have (for the most part) been trending up with their underlying numbers. All good things, though I wish it would happen sooner ha!

He is NOT going to be traded...it is all about understanding and proceeding to play prepare and execute with in a team system, and he will play more and be re-educated in Syracuse.
- wiz1901

That said, his agent just went public asking for a trade. By no means does that change whether or not he actually is traded, it is a development nonetheless...