I do know this a season is 82 games, not 1. I will not let loose this early, but Hawks looked much better as the game wore on. Frustrated at times, but lots of new faces trying to gel. System, I will give some time on as well, but not overly excited about it. No room on the ledge this morning, I am not there yet, but might be if they are still a train wreck by Thanksgiving.

Lot of guys were falling all over the place....they almost looked like half of them were hungover or gassed or sick......blowouts constantly...entering the zone...neutral zone...hell jones did a face plant trying to get a shot off in the last minute.

If they come back 1-1-1 to start the year....perfectly ok with it. They lost 4-2. Could have been a LOT worse, but also could have been better if they capitalize on the chances on their top end talent showed up.

And in fairness I thought Fleury.....was OK at best. Way too deep in his net on goal 1. Can't get deked out by a defensemen not named Makar. I was waiting for the poke check.
- SteveRain

You are right here. The Hawks were falling more than typical just tripping on their own skates a bit. Kane had some chances, Dach had some great chances, Toews had a good stuff chance on the PP, but they came up empty. Fleury had to be sharp and he was for the most part, but yeah, the a couple were stoppable.

Yep, there's a lot of selective memory here.
- mohel

You mean the 1 full season when Bowman dealt Panarin and Hammer in offseason prior and the 6 games into the next? Wasn't the year post Panarin when CC was out for a LONG time and they rode a bunch of crap goalies?

Pretty sure for the 9 previous years the system Q ran was perfectly OK...and did pretty well down in Florida as well.........

I do know this a season is 82 games, not 1. I will not let loose this early, but Hawks looked much better as the game wore on. Frustrated at times, but lots of new faces trying to gel. System, I will give some time on as well, but not overly excited about it. No room on the ledge this morning, I am not there yet, but might be if they are still a train wreck by Thanksgiving.
- ChicagoHope

100% they improved and settled in more as the game went on. These first few weeks could end up being make or break for JC.

Thats not the point. At least with Q when they were bad they looked like a bad pro team. With JC they look like my ex girlfriends kids team skating around with out any purpose blindly following the puck around and not knowing what to do when they have it.
- fattybeef

I'll have to dig for it...but I believe it was the Atlantic where Powers had an article detailing what scouts think of the hawks....when a scout was talking about Toews he mentioned "he has to buy in now" so with that said...in the past there was rumblings that some of the older guard wasn't buying into JC after Q....see Seabrook, Keith, Kane, and Toews.....only 2 remain so take that for what it is.

Not saying it's right, not saying it's 100% proof Toews is NOT supporting JC, but I found that interesting to mention that unprovoked by a scout of another team.

I do know this a season is 82 games, not 1. I will not let loose this early, but Hawks looked much better as the game wore on. Frustrated at times, but lots of new faces trying to gel. System, I will give some time on as well, but not overly excited about it. No room on the ledge this morning, I am not there yet, but might be if they are still a train wreck by Thanksgiving.
- ChicagoHope

System

Ist goal - 2 players collide causing a breakaway
2nd goal- tip form the point, the player was covered that tipped it, was not all alone in the slot
3rd goal- Ist F back ADB was back, but didn't recognize the play and was playing fre safety instead of picking up the late D coming in
4th goal- rebound after Kuemper made a big save that trickled under Fleury's pad.

To me breakdowns were not because of system coverage, but the Hawks D and forward coughing the puck up (how many give-aways did they have), AFTER gaining posession.

So to me team D is bad, but the D itself s not solely responsible, we have too many forwards that grade out as minuses defensively, even if they are "working" on their 200 foot game. If that doesn't change, you can haave the 1972-73 Montreal Canadiens defense, which consisted of 4 hall of famers, and a HOF goalie, and they would look bad.

I do know this a season is 82 games, not 1. I will not let loose this early, but Hawks looked much better as the game wore on. Frustrated at times, but lots of new faces trying to gel. System, I will give some time on as well, but not overly excited about it. No room on the ledge this morning, I am not there yet, but might be if they are still a train wreck by Thanksgiving.
- ChicagoHope

Drawing the Avalanche at altitude for game 1 with tons of new faces warrants a reprieve. Even the coming out awful part - you knew the "Lanche would be flying, exhibition games don't mean a whole lot and the Hawks saw a lot of Detroit and Minnesota in preseason.

Forget about Colliton's system. We can worry about that when the forwards are taking 100% responsibility to cover back and avoid endless odd-man rushes. Two players tripping over each other is bad luck. Waves of defensemen jumping into the play without coverage has to be fixed. Now.

The problem isn't that Seth Jones sucks. He doesn't, really. He had a bad game last night but that happens.

The problem is that he's just been a pretty average defenseman for a couple years now.
- BINGO!

Yeah, but he's still young, only 581 games under his belt. There's still a ceiling to be reached.

System

Ist goal - 2 players collide causing a breakaway
2nd goal- tip form the point, the player was covered that tipped it, was not all alone in the slot
3rd goal- Ist F back ADB was back, but didn't recognize the play and was playing fre safety instead of picking up the late D coming in
4th goal- rebound after Kuemper made a big save that trickled under Fleury's pad.

To me breakdowns were not because of system coverage, but the Hawks D and forward coughing the puck up (how many give-aways did they have), AFTER gaining posession.

So to me team D is bad, but the D itself s not solely responsible, we have too many forwards that grade out as minuses defensively, even if they are "working" on their 200 foot game. If that doesn't change, you can haave the 1972-73 Montreal Canadiens defense, which consisted of 4 hall of famers, and a HOF goalie
- LAHawk

What about the lack of gap control, and the countless guys wide open on back door plays, in the slot, uncovered at the point.....

I agree the overall D was bad, has been bad, but whatever defensive coverage he is asking them to play is failing......They look lost and run around clueless far more often then they are in the neighborhood and just lose 50/50 battles.

So to me, it's more system then it is just guys being selfish.

Yeah, but he's still young, only 581 games under his belt. There's still a ceiling to be reached.
- Dieselhead

yes...cut him tomorrow. Horrible trade. Awful contract.

Play DeHaan 39 minutes a night, and bring back Boqvist.

What about the lack of gap control, and the countless guys wide open on back door plays, in the slot, uncovered at the point.....

I agree the overall D was bad, has been bad, but whatever defensive coverage he is asking them to play is failing......They look lost and run around clueless far more often then they are in the neighborhood and just lose 50/50 battles.

So to me, it's more system then it is just guys being selfish.
- SteveRain

WE HAVE A WINNER

In case this hasn't been mentioned yet, Landeskog is having a hearing for the hit on Dach.

System

Ist goal - 2 players collide causing a breakaway
2nd goal- tip form the point, the player was covered that tipped it, was not all alone in the slot
3rd goal- Ist F back ADB was back, but didn't recognize the play and was playing fre safety instead of picking up the late D coming in
4th goal- rebound after Kuemper made a big save that trickled under Fleury's pad.

To me breakdowns were not because of system coverage, but the Hawks D and forward coughing the puck up (how many give-aways did they have), AFTER gaining posession.

So to me team D is bad, but the D itself s not solely responsible, we have too many forwards that grade out as minuses defensively, even if they are "working" on their 200 foot game. If that doesn't change, you can haave the 1972-73 Montreal Canadiens defense, which consisted of 4 hall of famers, and a HOF goalie
- LAHawk

From reading here; it appears that JC coaches players to run into each other, screen their own goalie, and forwards to not defend under any circumstances.

The forwards not playing defense has been a theme throughout JC's tenure. If that doesn't change, JC is toast. What's unknown is whether the next coach can gets these forwards to care about defense.

yes...cut him tomorrow. Horrible trade. Awful contract.

Play DeHaan 39 minutes a night, and bring back Boqvist.
- SteveRain

I mean it IS an awful trade and a horrible contract. I don't know why this team refused to stay the course ad properly rebuild. I love Dach but you needed more.

I mean it IS an awful trade and a horrible contract. I don't know why this team refused to stay the course ad properly rebuild. I love Dach but you needed more.
- BINGO!

The window is closing on Toews and Kane's contracts, so there was some sense of urgency to field a competitive team for today. If Toews wasn't coming back, they probably don't do that trade, (edit to add) let alone the trades for Fleury and Tyler Johnson. They might not sign McCabe, either.

That first goal was bad luck with McCabe falling down at the worst time, but what I really didn't like was goal #3 for the Avs. Carpenter made a weak pass which was a giveaway to the Avs which put the Hawks in a tough spot.

Debrincat was covering for the D. Then Carpenter who was at the end of his shift was more concerned with making a line change and smacking his stick on the boards than either hustling off the ice or hustling back to try to regain possession. There was a bit of a miscue with the Hawks D and Debrincat on swapping back to their normal coverage and Avs caught them in-between, but the coasting to get off the ice when the opposition team is rushing up ice to attack meant it was 3 Hawks trying to cover 4 guys.

I still think if Carpenter would have recognized that trying that pass was a dumb idea, and just reversed the puck back down low, the whole thing would have been avoided and he could have got off for a change.

Yeah, but he's still young, only 581 games under his belt. There's still a ceiling to be reached.
- Dieselhead

Yep, he's 27 and two years into the inevitable physical decline!

I mean it IS an awful trade and a horrible contract. I don't know why this team refused to stay the course ad properly rebuild. I love Dach but you needed more.
- BINGO!

Probably because of the allegations that came out. Seemed desperate to me

Or Bowman will be working for the blue Jackets soon

In case this hasn't been mentioned yet, Landeskog is having a hearing for the hit on Dach.
- 333inthe3rd

That hit on Dach was dirty and unnecessary at that point in the game. Dach was in a vulnerable position and if that is not intent to injure, then what is?

System

Ist goal - 2 players collide causing a breakaway
2nd goal- tip form the point, the player was covered that tipped it, was not all alone in the slot
3rd goal- Ist F back ADB was back, but didn't recognize the play and was playing fre safety instead of picking up the late D coming in
4th goal- rebound after Kuemper made a big save that trickled under Fleury's pad.

To me breakdowns were not because of system coverage, but the Hawks D and forward coughing the puck up (how many give-aways did they have), AFTER gaining posession.

So to me team D is bad, but the D itself s not solely responsible, we have too many forwards that grade out as minuses defensively, even if they are "working" on their 200 foot game. If that doesn't change, you can haave the 1972-73 Montreal Canadiens defense, which consisted of 4 hall of famers, and a HOF goalie, and they would look bad.
- LAHawk

You forgot the part about Murphy making a terrible pinch at the red line, while his team mates were changing. The responsible play is to retreat & defend until the change is complete.

That hit on Dach was dirty and unnecessary at that point in the game. Dach was in a vulnerable position and if that is not intent to injure, then what is?
- 67hawks

It's hard to give Landeskog the benefit of the doubt, given his past history.

WE HAVE A WINNER
- LAHawk

Better get this post in and hope somebody signs up for the season pass to get more E5s as the server seems to have lost a hampster.........

I am not saying in regards to the highlighted it is NOT possible......and if that is occurring, guys NOT buying in because they don't respect JC or whatever narrative, then Bowman has bigger fish to fry.

See how this progresses....going to give it 10 games or so and check back in.....in the meantime gods speed everyone.

Remember....

Dach is a bust
Uncle Dale is a god
Bowman fails at everything
Jones is a HORRIBLE deal....trade, contract, play...check with fancy stats to back that up

And god knows what else..........

It's hard to give Landeskog the benefit of the doubt, given his past history.
- 333inthe3rd

He's a Grade A turd.

That first goal was bad luck with McCabe falling down at the worst time, but what I really didn't like was goal #3 for the Avs. Carpenter made a weak pass which was a giveaway to the Avs which put the Hawks in a tough spot.

Debrincat was covering for the D. Then Carpenter who was at the end of his shift was more concerned with making a line change and smacking his stick on the boards than either hustling off the ice or hustling back to try to regain possession. There was a bit of a miscue with the Hawks D and Debrincat on swapping back to their normal coverage and Avs caught them in-between, but the coasting to get off the ice when the opposition team is rushing up ice to attack meant it was 3 Hawks trying to cover 4 guys.

I still think if Carpenter would have recognized that trying that pass was a dumb idea, and just reversed the puck back down low, the whole thing would have been avoided and he could have got off for a change.
- breadbag

TBF, the Avs did have 7 players on the ice, so our D may have been confused about which 5 they should be covering.

That hit on Dach was dirty and unnecessary at that point in the game. Dach was in a vulnerable position and if that is not intent to injure, then what is?
- 67hawks

I was wondering why a major was not called, taking a run at someone in a vulnerable position.