This from the Athletic Weekly Digest (May need subscription to access). Nice article analyzing team pps'

"When the Blackhawks win an offensive zone faceoff, they’re basically league average in terms of what they attempt and put on net. When they lose an offensive zone faceoff or on OTF shifts, they’ve really struggled to put shots together. To me, this is suggestive of difficulties gaining the offensive zone for both PP1 and PP2. I took a look at Chicago’s game against Edmonton last weekend and there were a lot of ugly looking entry attempts. Even when Chicago got into Edmonton’s end, they frequently seemed to end up with an isolated puck carrier and a possession that fizzled.

Certainly in that game, where Chicago generated just five 5-on-4 shot attempts in 7:42, zone entries looked like a real issue for the Blackhawks. They aren’t great at generating shot attempts anyway but they’re really struggling when they have to enter the offensive zone."

Manning will be fine. He’s just been going through a slight rough stretch. His advanced stats have actually improved the past four games, so I hope the eye test will get better as well.

Season maybe about to go down the S_ _tter, as Jim Carey said said but Hawks Jersey is still Number 1 with a fairly large sample of players from NHL PA. It's why the logo is on my Tacoma truck. And I love the informed opinions of fans of Blackhawks here. You guys know hockey and game in, game out you know who is putting out. Ironic, but more so that the boys in the suits not at ice level. I'm huge on play the youth in the lineup, and save on cap There is enough. Hall of Famers here to inspire. Mentor and motivate. Pivotal game with Calgary tonight

Schmaltz returns to lineup after healthy scratch. No 40 or 62. No 22 either.

Forward lines:
20, 19, and 12.
8, 15, and 88.
14, 64, and 24.
84, 16, and 29.

Defensive pairings:
2 and 28.
7 and 56.
44 and 23.

Schmaltz returns to lineup after healthy scratch. 8, 88, and 15. Saad makes a jump in lines as well. 20, 12, and 19.
- I Am The Breadman

That's good to hear. Now just work on the bottom 6. Maybe something like:

DeBrincat - Toews - Saad
Schmaltz - Anisimov - Kane
Fortin - Johnson - Kahun
Hayden - Kruger - Kampf
Kunitz

I personally would slot Johnson down for Hayden on the 4th line then call up Sikura to play 3rd line with at least Kahun. Fortin is starting to fade. His speed is there but that's about it.

Who then to play 3C? Ideally Anisimov but that would necessitate Schmaltz to slot back as 2C and get him and Kane another top 6 winger to play their LW.

New Blackhawks lines:
DeBrincat-Toews-Saad
Schmaltz-Anisimov-Kane
Kunitz-Kampf-Kahun
Fortin-Kruger-Martinsen

Looks like Jan Rutta is back in, and Brandon Davidson is back out.

Manning will be fine. He’s just been going through a slight rough stretch. His advanced stats have actually improved the past four games, so I hope the eye test will get better as well.
- boxcar65

Are you on the Blackhawks' payroll?

New Blackhawks lines:
DeBrincat-Toews-Saad
Schmaltz-Anisimov-Kane
Kunitz-Kampf-Kahun
Fortin-Kruger-Martinsen

Looks like Jan Rutta is back in, and Brandon Davidson is back out.
- walleyeb1

Nice to Saad on that Toews line. They needed a shakeup and maybe Kahun can help spark something in the bottom 6. If he can't those bottom 6 are going have a heck of a time scoring.

Go back a few years..... Hawks finish the season in first place but bomb out in the playoffs. Maybe somebody is really pissed. Could it be angry decision is made to shake up the team. Three guys are traded that summer. What they all had in common was none of them had a no trade contract. Coincidence? Think about it. Next, were they the right guys to trade? Well the next year Hawks finished in LAST place. Oh by the way the Panarin signing a couple years earlier would have been the one huge legitimate feather in Bowman's legacy cap until then. All the stuff about cost certainty and secret reasons is just so much silly BS IMO. Cost certainty is actually insulting.

New Blackhawks lines:
DeBrincat-Toews-Saad
Schmaltz-Anisimov-Kane
Kunitz-Kampf-Kahun
Fortin-Kruger-Martinsen

Looks like Jan Rutta is back in, and Brandon Davidson is back out.
- walleyeb1

Sarcasm aside, I’m surprised Q didn’t sit Schmaltz for a second game.

Hopefully loading up the top 6 gets the offense going.

Sarcasm aside, I’m surprised Q didn’t sit Schmaltz for a second game.

Hopefully loading up the top 6 gets the offense going.
- DarthKane

Seeing as Q is bent on keeping Kunitz in, at least swap him with Fortin.

Sarcasm aside, I’m surprised Q didn’t sit Schmaltz for a second game.

Hopefully loading up the top 6 gets the offense going.
- DarthKane

With the looks of that lineup I'm not sure Q can afford to sit him. These guys need to find a way to score some goals.

This team is really missing someone that can score in the bottom 6.

If Victor Ejdsell gets on a bit of a streak you may see him up in the NHL. He could be a trigger man on the powerplay as well with his shot.

Go back a few years..... Hawks finish the season in first place but bomb out in the playoffs. Maybe somebody is really pissed. Could it be angry decision is made to shake up the team. Three guys are traded that summer. What they all had in common was none of them had a no trade contract. Coincidence? Think about it. Next, were they the right guys to trade? Well the next year Hawks finished in LAST place. Oh by the way the Panarin signing a couple years earlier would have been the one huge legitimate feather in Bowman's legacy cap until then. All the stuff about cost certainty and secret reasons is just so much silly BS IMO. Cost certainty is actually insulting.
- Savoy

So's this post. You weren't on here when guy's were screaming that Stan way overpaid for Crawford and got "cost certainty", but look no further than him not being able to play for why the team finished in last.

So you trade a superstar with two years left on his contract making only 3.5 million a year for a third string goalie and an underperforming forward with 3 years left on his contract making 6 million a year who by the way mgt with their room temperature I Q refused to pay the first time around and you happily gain almost one year of 'cost certainty'. This could only make sense and be a really good deal for Chicago on this particular message board and other teams wishes for the Blackhawks and nowhere else in our solar system except perhaps a few opium dens at peak business times in China.
- Savoy

Panarin's bridge deal was 2 years, 6 mil aav.

Panarin's bridge deal was 2 years, 6 mil aav.
- I Am The Breadman

That is correct and I took my post down for that reason.

That is correct and I took my post down for that reason.
- Savoy

Oh okay, its all good. Mistakes happen.

Go back a few years..... Hawks finish the season in first place but bomb out in the playoffs. Maybe somebody is really pissed. Could it be angry decision is made to shake up the team. Three guys are traded that summer. What they all had in common was none of them had a no trade contract. Coincidence? Think about it. Next, were they the right guys to trade? Well the next year Hawks finished in LAST place. Oh by the way the Panarin signing a couple years earlier would have been the one huge legitimate feather in Bowman's legacy cap until then. All the stuff about cost certainty and secret reasons is just so much silly BS IMO. Cost certainty is actually insulting.
- Savoy

So you trade a superstar with two years left on his contract making only 6 million a year for a third string goalie and an underperforming forward with 3 years left on his contract making 6 million a year who by the way mgt with their room temperature I Q refused to pay the first time around and you happily gain almost one year of 'cost certainty'. This could only make sense and be a really good deal for Chicago on this particular message board and other teams wishes for the Blackhawks and nowhere else in our solar system except perhaps a few opium dens at peak business times in China.
- Savoy

The Ward signing was a desperation move to satisfy the masses IMO. They could not go into the season with the questions on CC and starting Forsberg as the number 1. I'm OK with it I guess because of Forsberg's inconsistency last year. Thank God CC is back so now it's on them to figure out what's next there.

I know I'm in the minority here but I just can't stomach the coaching philosophies, interviews, and disciplinary tactics any longer. Whether it's Quenneville, Ulf, or Dineen, they constantly spew the same BS game after game and even during the game in the interviews between periods. "More bodies to the net, more shots at the net, more rebounds needed, better spacing from the D, forwards need to get back, better decisions on pinching, on and on and on.

Guess what ?? The message isn't getting through gentlemen !! You can't fire the players so what do organizations do to inject life into the system ? YES coaching changes are needed. It's been 3 years of a downslide and now it's happening again in year 4. We can all watch and notice that most of the Hawks top players are having really good years. Keith and Seabrook are better this year than last so far.
Toews is back, Kane is a leader in the league in goals, Debrincat is having an even better year and if put with Kane, who knows what happens. CC has been unbelievable for the most part as well. So that's 6 of your top players having better years and the team is not winning consistently. Saad and Schmaltz ????

SO, Is Nick Schmaltz the whipping boy for not scoring enough, not shooting enough, not playing physical enough, whatever. So Quenneville decides to send a message and sits him. I don't agree with it in this case. Sitting Seabrook last year for one game had reasoning because of his age and poor pylon play. I would prefer to see Schmaltz handled differently. Remember what Herb Brooks did with his 1980 Olympians when they weren't working hard enough during the game ?
If you're not going to work hard during the game, you're going to work hard in practice. Skate his ass off along with everybody else during practice to the point where they'll realize what "relentless" means. That's what Q promised us this year, "relentless", but that means for 3 periods on 1 or 2. With horrible 3rd periods this year, I see a TEAM that's out of gas, not just Nick Schmaltz. It's the Joel Quenneville Country Club atmosphere that has created this monster for years and I will be ecstatic when the change is finally made. These players NEED a new voice. Q's antiquated methods are going to fail again and another wasted year of the window is happening, even with marked improvement from their best players. Yes Stan is to blame as well for all his shortcoming in negotiations of contracts, clauses, and terrible decisions on free agents and trades. But I believe that this team can be a playoff team and a threat if it were coached better. That's my opinion.

Who is to blame for this horrific Power Play ? Dineen ?? NO.....it's ultimately on Quenneville.

We've been told that they've worked on system changes, yet all we see is the same poor execution on entry, push em back or whatever, nobody shooting from the prime area in the slot, no rebound opportunities because nobody is near the net , etc. It is terrible and totally demotivates the team because of consistent failure. ONE power play goal a game is needed to change most of these outcomes.
This is a COACHING problem PEROD !! It's time to load up on PP #1 with your best 5 offensive players. That's Kane, Toews, Debrincat, Schmaltz and Jokiharju.
Somebody coach a system that gets shots from the slot area PLEASE and utilize your best players together with INTENSITY !! The second unit can be whomever after Saad and Anisimov. Maybe another top 6 forward is needed on this team ???
Yes we all know that....along with a top 4 Dman, but until that day comes, they have to get results with what they have. That's on COACHING.

I honestly hope they don't wait until Christmas (Rocky) to realize that this season is salvageable with a coaching change. Somebody to infuse some fire and intensity for 60 minutes that Quennevile has promised.
- Hawkytalk

Hawkytalk - very valid points. Q has been stale-dated for a while now. Always thought he got too much credit when successful. However, it was he was bringing to the table it is clearly not working anymore. Times have passed him by - same old, same old just not working.

Chemistry, urgency, disciplined play, positioning, decision making...look at the Toews turnover in the slot against vancouver, or Gustafson last night with a pinch at the blue line where he gets neither puck nor man, THEN does not bust his ass back and is gliding into the slot as the Oilers complete a 2v1 passing play for a goal..overpassing always instead of playing simple and throwing pucks/bodies to the net.....a league worst Powerplay when you have a Top 3 offensive talent in the world in Patty kane....not playing Jokiharju on the PP when Seabrook/Keith have been key cogs on a dogpoop PP for years!
- EnzoD

Enzo - GREAT points. I thought there was not nearly enough criticism of Toews and his absolutely bonehead, lazy pass gifting the Canucks the win. It was freakin’ 2-2 in the 3rd. Also I never need to see Gus play ever again. He not only is brutal, in his defensive end, he doesn’t care at all about playing defence. Don’t forget his lazy back in, fly-by slide in OT taking himself completely out of the play on the McJesus goal. His fail to hustle in the last game while on the PP was pathetic. I’m surprised he just didn’t stay at the other team’s blueline.

I think the failures of this team all rests with Q. Bowman has given him the talent he needs. Look at the guys who were let go after last year that are playing well to start the season. Q just does not want to change with the times, his style of play is stale. Don't even get me started on Ulf. He is terrible, doesn't even now what he is talking about during those 3rd period interviews they do with him. The whole coaching staff needs to go and Coliton needs to be promoted.
- ToewsdNKanefusd

Someone other than me criticising Ulf. Nice. In the interviews Ulf seems too dumb to carry on a conversation.

I’m not as concerned with the timing, because I don’t really see this season as salvageable. Although I suppose that depends on what your definition of salvageable is.

For me the bottom line is they just don’t have the horses to be anything more than a team that might battle for a wild card spot. I don’t see any kind of trade that can fix that and really don’t want Stan messing with the team anymore.
- walleyeb1

This Q doesn’t have the horses argument is such bologna. I suppose the Canucks’ and Coyotes’ coaches HAVE the horses. Enough.

With the Lightning singing Gourde long term I wonder if there is a chance to poach a Centre from them? Paquette? Cirelli? Point?

Okay NHL GM, since you're the expert, with average reading skills, how bout contributing to the discussion as to what it would take for the Hawks to acquire him back?
- nickmo2699

The Hawks can't afford to keep him. Stan has already bankrolled too many overpriced players to afford Panarin. If they did get him they would have to cut the roster down to ? ? ? 16 players to meet cap requirements.

Hawkytalk - very valid points. Q has been stale-dated for a while now. Always thought he got too much credit when successful. However, it was he was bringing to the table it is clearly not working anymore. Times have passed him by - same old, same old just not working.
- Z3Hawk

If Q was as good as some posters claim, he would still be with the Blues or Avalanche. He lucked out with the Hawks' job at the time when a deep team was on the rise. As the team has declined, he has been looking more like the midnight Cinderella.

If Q was as good as some posters claim, he would still be with the Blues or Avalanche. He lucked out with the Hawks' job at the time when a deep team was on the rise. As the team has declined, he has been looking more like the midnight Cinderella.
- 67hawks