The Chicago Blackhawks have 15 games left in the season, and as the Hawks sit second-to-last in the NHL standings for the second season in a row, it seems a growing number of fans are questioning the direction of the team.
Some have even dared to question whether Connor Bedard is the answer to the Hawks’ future.
The Tribune’s Phil Thompson dives into all that and more in his Blackhawks mailbag.
Note: Some letters have been lightly edited for brevity or clarity.
Thank you for your coverage of the Chicago Blackhawks. I have a question. I was in Nashville for the Predators game a week ago and the game was tied at the end of regulation. During the 5 minute overtime, the Blackhawks just tried to kill the overtime without scoring. The Predators, on the other hand, were aggressive and won the game. Why were the Blackhawks so passive? Do they think if they kill the overtime, they’ll do better in the shootout? Even so, their passivity was seriously disturbing to the Blackhawks fans in the arena. — Bruce P.
On the one hand, the Hawks have tended to fall into the same habit they’ve had on the power play: Cycling in the zone looking for the perfect shot.
It’s partially why they didn’t get off a shot on goal in the Predators game or during an earlier overtime loss to the Ottawa Senators.
On the other hand, the bigger culprit in the loss to the Predators was Ryan Donato picking the wrong time to make a line change, creating open ice for Steven Stamkos’ game-winner.
I didn’t feel like the Hawks were being passive or playing for the shootout, just a little too selective with their shots and cognizant that three-on-three can easily create a counter-rush with a well-placed rebound.
“I think in overtime in general you have to be mindful with your shot selection,” Hawks interim coach Anders Sorensen said. “Goalies are so good today that if you’re just shooting from the perimeter, there’s no traffic or movement on the goalie, they’re probably going to stop it and it almost ends up being a turnover.
“So in general in overtime, you have to be mindful of how you’re shooting, when you’re shooting and from what distance you’re shooting, for sure.”
Total disarray, trade Connor. — Tom K.
Well, um, that was succinct.
For context, the last couple of Hawks games haven’t been pretty, though you could say that about a lot of games this season. Bedard finished the last two games with 10-minute misconduct penalties, and he has looked short of the phenom his talent promised to be.
But let’s break this down.
1. Bedard is having a minor rough patch, nothing that warrants doing anything crazy like trading the franchise (though there are plenty of Vancouver Canucks fans who’d be more than happy to hear you out).
And who’s going to replace him?
Bedard is still the engine that drives the offense and draws the most attention from defenses, even if other players have been putting up the statistics lately. When the Hawks acquire more legitimate offensive threats, likely through the free agent market or trade, then it’ll be fair to scrutinize how he performs next to better talent.
As far as the back-to-back games with misconduct penalties, that’ll be forgotten about in a week.
In the Canucks game, his only transgression was getting caught in a scrum while coming to the aid of Lukas Reichel.
Bedard said he didn’t get an explanation from a referee, but “probably because there’s a couple minutes left in the game, I guess he got everyone off. So I don’t really know.”
2. Let’s chalk up the “disarray” talk to fan frustration, the masses rightfully reaching the limits of their patience with the rebuild.
In the past, any minimal signs of progress amounted to patchwork, but now we’re seeing signs of the young nucleus establishing a foundation, especially since some veterans have been traded.
Jason Dickinson, one of the remaining veteran team leaders, told the Tribune, “I think the guys, the young guys in particular, are taking ownership of the team and their career. They could be coached all you want. You can have somebody stand over them and tell them, ‘Hey, do this, do that,’ hold their hand through everything, eventually it has to be taken upon themselves to go and apply it and go and do it. …
“Instead of just watching the direction of the team, they are the direction. They are what’s going to push the team forward.”
Dear Mr. Thompson,
Your comment, may I quote:
“Perhaps something about Bedard’s bedside manner is off-putting, especially coming from a 19-year-old when you’re a veteran official like Rooney, who officiated his first game nearly 25 years ago and has worked six Stanley Cup Finals, including the Hawks’ win over the Boston Bruins in 2013.”
(It) is so spot-on that I forwarded it to a geezer friend who follows the Hawks with me, as I have since the ’61 Cup. He agreed wholeheartedly.
Thank you so much for your observation on Bedard. Sadly, he appears (to be) a disappointment. At least thus far.
Love your work. — Doug N., retired in California
This letter refers to Bedard’s 10-minute misconduct penalty for “abuse of officials” during the game against the San Jose Sharks, the first of back-to-back nights with game misconducts.
I believe in any sport there’s an art to “negotiating” with referees, a contract of mutual trust, understanding and respect that’s built over time, which then carries with it the freedom to speak more candidly.
It’s one thing to receive the occasional flippant remark from a peer, someone who’s at least in the ballpark of your life and game experiences. It’s another thing to sense disrespect from someone years your junior in both aspects.
“Respect your elders” is a cultural norm for a reason, and sports aren’t immune to it.
That’s why getting lip about your job performance from a teen, no matter who it is (and given you worked your first NHL game five years before he was born), probably “hits different,” as Bedard’s generation would say.
When asked about 37-year-old veteran Nick Foligno, who’s no stranger to jawing with officials, Sorensen replied, “Well, Nick’s our captain, so that comes with the territory.
“If you’re a captain or assistant captain, those are the guys refs want to talk to,” Sorensen said. “Those are the guys who are supposed to talk to refs. Obviously other players have relationships with refs, and that’s something that grows over the years; you get to know them and get to talk to them.
“But that’s why Nick does a lot of that.”
Instead of throwing (general manager Kyle) Davidson softball questions why not do some real reporting and question him as to why he should keep his job? Or whether he understands how much Hawks fans think he’s a big part of the problem. I understand rebuilds, but rebuilds have to turn a corner at some point, and this one just goes on and on yet he never really gets called out for it. When do you or others on the beat start seriously questioning his abilities — like every Hawks fan does — to lead this team? Instead of just buying his same old mealy-mouthed “the great rebuild’s coming” BS? — Scott F.
First of all: Ouch.
Second, while I think it’s bad form to ask a player, coach or general manager if they should “keep his job” (and this is from someone who once asked Seth Jones if he deserved his All-Star selection), I have routinely challenged Davidson about his decisions, such as picking a defenseman like Artyom Levshunov or a talented winger like Ivan Demidov or whether his free agent acquisitions have flopped.
Or when will he start packaging some of the Hawks’ plentiful draft assets for “big-ticket” players who can move the needle?
“We’ve certainly thought about it,” Davidson said after the trade deadline. “Obviously we didn’t do anything (at the deadline), but you’re always thinking about those things. …
“That’s something we do have to consider. But we’ve got some really nice pieces that we feel are valuable around the league, and when it comes to exploring what those bring, we have done that and we will continue to do that. But it takes two to tango, so we’ll keep grinding away.”
And by no means it is just me.
Others have recently questioned when the Hawks will see tangible signs of progress, too, and how that will be measured.
So no one’s “buying” everything Davidson’s dishing, but you can only ask the questions (and the follow-ups) and publish his answers.
And on occasion, you write columns explaining whether you think he’s right.