The most important part of the Chicago’s semi-dynasty
- Thread starter FrankSidebottom
- Start date
LightningStorm
Lightning/Mets/Vikings
Keith was definitely their best and most important player at the time. He controlled the ice out there. But I don't think there's a wrong choice between Keith and depth. I always viewed those Hawks teams as great more due to depth than high end talent, but Keith absolutely was a high end talent during that time. In fact if depth wasn't an option and just between their 3 best players, I'd take Keith without hesitation.
JaegerDice
The mark of my dignity shall scar thy DNA
- Dec 26, 2014
- 25,253
- 10,941
Keith > Toews > Kane > Depth
At the end of the day, as with every cup winner, it came down to the Blackhawks best simply being better than the other team’s best.
At the end of the day, as with every cup winner, it came down to the Blackhawks best simply being better than the other team’s best.
clydesdale line
Connor BeJesus
- Jan 10, 2012
- 24,759
- 25,833
LightningStorm
Lightning/Mets/Vikings
I think it was the Blackhawks best being the most balanced during that period. Chicago and Pittsburgh both won 3 but never met in the finals. Had they met, I would've picked Chicago due to their superior balance. Pens had the all time great 1-2 center punch, but no #1 D like Keith, plus the Hawks (especially on D) were deeper. Meanwhile, for the Kings C/D combo of Kopitar/Doughty, I'd rank them just barely ahead of Keith/Toews, but LA didn't have a dynamic scoring forward like Kane. Great depth as well as balance across positions for the big 3 was the key to the Blackhawks success.
CokenoPepsi
Registered User
- Oct 28, 2016
- 4,944
- 3,127
I mean, no? I don't see much of an argument for Toews having more impact goals and that is even with for some odd reason we subtract Kane's OT goals which would just be silly
Gurglesons
Registered User
Kane.
Keith was a huge part of the 2015 cup, but in the other two runs the D core as a whole with Oduya, Campbell, Seabrook, Hammer, etc was very well balanced.
Toews was great, but a lot of his success came from his partnership with Hossa.
Kane carried the 2nd line and was named Showtime for a reason.
Keith was a huge part of the 2015 cup, but in the other two runs the D core as a whole with Oduya, Campbell, Seabrook, Hammer, etc was very well balanced.
Toews was great, but a lot of his success came from his partnership with Hossa.
Kane carried the 2nd line and was named Showtime for a reason.
nowhereman
Registered User
The answer is depth. Compare them to the Penguins, who had Crosby, Malkin, and Letang all in their prime. That is a vastly better top 3 than Toews, Kane and Keith. What was the difference and the reason the Hawks won the Cup 3 times instead of the Penguins between 2010-2015?
Depth.
Keith was the best individual player but depth is the reason they were a pseudo-dynasty.
Depth.
Keith was the best individual player but depth is the reason they were a pseudo-dynasty.
ClydeLee
Registered User
- Mar 23, 2012
- 11,790
- 6,277
I did vote Keith, and 2015 he kinds usurped this. But i like your points though I'd say it works better saying why did the Blackhawks win in 10,13,15 Vs why didn't they the surrounding years. Also speaking of Pittsburgh, what did they have 16 & 17 vs 10-15/18-now.
And really it is depth. The years both these teams won, they generally had 3 scoring lines and a 4th line shutdown line. The 2010 Hawks 4th line was more energy back when that was still the trend of cup contenders. And they each had 3 pairs they could play... apart from how Keith carried the Hawks in playing so much in 2015.
But the years they lost. Look they have goons playing in playoff games. Or they have garbage 5th/6th dman to start a playoffs. Or are a 1 line threat of a team offensively only. It's depth that matters in a cup run
JaegerDice
The mark of my dignity shall scar thy DNA
- Dec 26, 2014
- 25,253
- 10,941
Depth only matters when your top players are good enough to cancel out the other team’s top players. Depth has never won a series where one team’s best was curbstomped by the other team’s best. Chicago didnt lose to Nashville cause their bottom 6 was weak, they lost because Toews, Kane and Keith were all kicked up and down the ice.
I agree that Keith was their most important player but just like with Tampa it was the fully loaded team from top to bottom that made them as great as they were, every single line and defensive pair they threw out could match up favourably against most teams
JaegerDice
The mark of my dignity shall scar thy DNA
- Dec 26, 2014
- 25,253
- 10,941
Kruger was a GOAT shutdown center. You could put any two plugs beside him for dungeon dzone starts and he’d flip the ice against top 6 competition.
this guy gets it^
all joking aside at the time he was the best shutdown 4c in the league that could take the toughest assignments and still chip in a bit offensively
Caps8112
Registered User
- Aug 12, 2008
- 3,427
- 2,325
this should be Depth and not even close. the depth scoring in the playoffs is always whats win. Caps didnt win till they got it. Penguins Bonino line. Tampa had plenty of depth heros. IIRC Hawks had a bunch of 3rd and 4th line heros during those runs.
Nico Cauzuki
Registered User
JaegerDice
The mark of my dignity shall scar thy DNA
- Dec 26, 2014
- 25,253
- 10,941
I’ll repeat the obvious, but depth only becomes a factor once you reach a point where the top players are matched or canceled out. I cant think of a series where the winning team’s best players were demolished by the other team’s best players but the depth pulled out the win.
Your best players have to be your best players. Its cliche but true. How many 3rd or 4th liners win the Conn Smythe?
The Blackhawks depth was great. They won because Toews, Kane and Keith (and Crawford) outperformed the top guys on the other team.
WarriorofTime
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2010
- 29,323
- 27,126
Toews being the best matchup Center in the NHL for a while. Always won his matchup 5 on 5 no matter who was on the other side come postseason. This was huge in the very low scoring western conference playoffs in that era. Toews has quickly become one of the most underrated players from HFBoards perspective. No disrespect to what was a very elite all-around core, just think I'd have to go with Toews as the most important guy if you were to reduce it to 1 player.
- Aug 24, 2011
- 27,928
- 15,857
If the question is being asked reluctantly I have to go with Kieth. Look at how ineffective teams are without a true #1D.
Toronto and Edmonton definitely don't have one. Both have world class 1C's and a deadly top 6 but don't have any close resembling a Lidstrom, Kieth, Chara, Doughty, Hedman, Peitrangelo, Makar on the roster. THAT is the difference. Kieth averaged 28 minutes a game in the playoffs. Elite in all three zones. During the cup years he was 56pt/game player that was shutting down your best lines. Kieth was all over the place all the time, it was nuts. Making scoring chances/stopping rinse repeat for the most part.
Depth and all yeah yeah, it's a must for every Cup winner though. Plenty of deep teams without star power lose in the playoffs all the time. You need the superstars at the most important positions and it's almost always the case.
Matthews and McDavid/Draisaitl not having any playoff wins past the 2nd round proves that to me at least. Regardless of your forwards if you don't have a 1D capable of that you're not seriously a Cup contender.
Toronto and Edmonton definitely don't have one. Both have world class 1C's and a deadly top 6 but don't have any close resembling a Lidstrom, Kieth, Chara, Doughty, Hedman, Peitrangelo, Makar on the roster. THAT is the difference. Kieth averaged 28 minutes a game in the playoffs. Elite in all three zones. During the cup years he was 56pt/game player that was shutting down your best lines. Kieth was all over the place all the time, it was nuts. Making scoring chances/stopping rinse repeat for the most part.
Depth and all yeah yeah, it's a must for every Cup winner though. Plenty of deep teams without star power lose in the playoffs all the time. You need the superstars at the most important positions and it's almost always the case.
Matthews and McDavid/Draisaitl not having any playoff wins past the 2nd round proves that to me at least. Regardless of your forwards if you don't have a 1D capable of that you're not seriously a Cup contender.
Matty Sundin
Registered User
- Jul 18, 2006
- 3,396
- 5,079
Pick one player? It’s Kane. Cup ot winning goal, conn smythe, hart, art ross, mutiple clutch goals and plays.
Obviously they don’t have that dynasty without missing one of Toews, Keith, insane depth, but Kane was the face of that semi dynasty they had.
Obviously they don’t have that dynasty without missing one of Toews, Keith, insane depth, but Kane was the face of that semi dynasty they had.
CokenoPepsi
Registered User
- Oct 28, 2016
- 4,944
- 3,127
Eh he wasn't quite as good as Bergeron or Kopitar but close.
But he absolutely lost to Daniel Briere in 2010... Toews was a team worse -5 that series
Buck Naked
Can't-Stand-Ya
- Aug 18, 2016
- 3,567
- 6,088
Deep teams usually win and we've seen in recent years what happens when you lose that depth.
Colorado, Tampa, Pittsburgh, Chicago.. All pretty much kept their stars, lost their depth and fell out of contention. Vegas kept most of their depth and looks like they will challenge again this year.
Colorado, Tampa, Pittsburgh, Chicago.. All pretty much kept their stars, lost their depth and fell out of contention. Vegas kept most of their depth and looks like they will challenge again this year.
Caps8112
Registered User
- Aug 12, 2008
- 3,427
- 2,325
well i disagree. You take away the hawks depth they had during those 3 runs and they win none of them, no matter how great Toews, Kane and keith play. Its obviously a combination of both but the secondary scoring is what wins series. Crosby, Malkin, Ovi, Toews, Kane and all the superstars are going to get their points no matter what in a series but its the secondary scoring that puts one team over the top. Look at the penguins years with the bonino line. That line was almost their best line every series and no team had their own answer to it. Ovi had great playoff numbers every year but the rest of his teams scoring dried up when he was young. The year Kuzy continued his reg season scoring and the team got secondary scoring from the 3rd and 4th lines they won. You can look at every team that wins and its the same thing.
