The bubble of the Blackhawks is on.
After introducing the NHL’s expanded postseason format as the 23rd of the 24 seeded total, the Blackhawks drew a rather astonishing play-in-round uprising from the Edmonton Oilers to secure their place in the Round of 16. That landed them a matchup against the top-seeded Vegas Golden Knights and, unfortunately for Chicago, things were not so good there. Five games later and they leave the playoff bubble in Edmonton.
So, where did things go wrong for Chicago? Let’s take a look at some of the reasons why the Blackhawks are home.
Getty Images
A complete mismatch
From the start, this did not see a series that the Blackhawks were aiming to win. Sometimes you can look at a team and recognize that, even though they may not be as good as their opponent on paper, their powers as a style create a mismatch against a superior opponent. (Think of the Blue Jackets vs. Maple Leafs in the play-in round.)
That was not at all the case with the Blackhawks vs. Golden Knights. Not only did Vegas look better on paper, but their strengths (offensive zone possession and forward control) were perfectly matched to take advantage of Chicago’s weak spots (lack of defensive zone structure and discipline). If things went the way we thought they would, it would be a quick series. And, as it turns out, they did … and that was it.
That brings us to …
Impossibility to suppress the attack of Golden Knights
The possession numbers in this series were overwhelming in favor of Vegas, which shouldn’t really come as much of a surprise, considering how well Vegas can ride the puck and how unreliable Chicago team defense can be. Let’s take a quick look at the 5v5 numbers in the five games this series, thanks to Natural Stat Trick:
- Shot attempts: 305 – 202, VGK
- Shots on net: 158 – 96, VGK
- High-risk opportunities: 62 – 32, VGK
- Expected goals: 13.4 – 6.9, VGK
- Goals: 13-8, VGK
The Golden Knights did an excellent job of keeping pressure in the offensive zone and generating chances, while the Blackhawks were kept on their heels at 5v5. Corey Crawford basically sat this whole series and, honestly, it’s a credit to him that things were not much worse for Chicago on the scoreboard. Crawford stopped 172 of 187 shots (.920 saving percentage) he faced in the series (at 5v5: 145 of 158, .918 saving percentage).
The line of Toews
For the Blackhawks to have any chance in this series, they needed the top of their lineup – including Jonathan Toews’ topline – to have an unbelievable series. They could not do enough, and Toews’ unit had a very rough thing.
The Blackhawks captain was able to come on board with a goal in Game 5, but he had just two points in the series, as Dominik Kubalik did. It’s hard to pin a lot of blame on Toews individually when he played with two unexpected wingers on the youngest team in the playoffs, but Chicago’s top unit had a very difficult time matching Vegas’ top forward in this series.
At 5v5, Toews’ line had just 36 percent of shot attempts and 33 percent of shots. That unit contributed one goal and stood for five against on the ice. You will not win too many games if one of your top lines is exceeded to that extent.
This leads us into …
Coaching
Simply put, it was not the best series of young Blackhawks coach Jeremy Colliton, especially when his team had its back against the wall. It was clear that adjustments had to be made, especially to the topline, but Colliton made some dubious line-up decisions – no more confusing than inserting John Quenneville on the wing of Toews in Game 5.
Quenneville was a healthy crate for the entire series leading up to Game 5 and suddenly he gets a slot on the top line in an elimination game? Oh, okay. The presence of Quenneville did almost nothing for Chicago. By making matters worse, Colliton continued to play him, even when it turned out that it did not work. In 13:28 of the 5v5 ice age, the Blackhawks were 3-10 out and out 7-16 with Quenneville on the ice.
In fact, that ice age included Quenneville was escaped with less than three minutes left in the 3rd period, while Chicago was by one goal. Pretty memorable. Part of adjusting adjustments is recognizable when your adjustments are not working, and Colliton seemed to see an alarming lack of response or urgency when it came to watering the boat.
Again, the defense
That can not really be said enough … this Blackhawks team needs a defensive revision before they can be taken really seriously. Just as it’s hard to blame Toews for not being able to carry his line, it’s hard to blame a 37-year-old Duncan Keith for not being able to stand tall as the pillar of this defensive group. Keith had on average more than 25 minutes of ice time in this series and things did not go so well for him. His only contribution to the scoresheet was an assist in Game 4 and he was a minus-6 in the series (on the ice for four goals for, 10 against at 5v5).
Honestly, the Blackhawks started a good fight, but this group was just not good enough to resist an elite team like Vegas, and the most brilliant issue is the defense. The onus is (and has been) on the front office to find more stability at the back end, and at this point I’m not sure Stan Bowman is the man for the job.
