Skip to content

Chicago’s power play is problematic

Jun 16, 2013, 11:25 AM EDT

2013 NHL Stanley Cup Final - Game Two Getty Images

With the series tied up 1-1 both teams have had a chance to see what is and isn’t working for them. For the Chicago Blackhawks, their Achilles’ heel is clearly their power play.

Through two games, the Blackhawks are 0-6 on the man advantage and haven’t looked good in those six chances. Captain Jonathan Toews tells Scott Powers of that the Bruins penalty kill has plenty to do with their power play failure.

“They’ve got a good penalty kill and so do we,” Toews said. “It’s tough to go out there and do everything that you want to do every single time you get the chance. We had a good first power play. We created some chances there.”

Toews attributes some bad luck and bad breaks to coming up empty. Broken sticks will happen sometimes. Truth is, the Blackhawks have enough talent on their power play to do better than they have. Not scoring in 15 straight power plays, however, shows that it may be more than the Bruins’ PK that’s making things happen.

  1. spitfisher - Jun 16, 2013 at 11:31 AM

    The Hawks could simplify it( the PP), but I happen to think its more about the team they are playing. Boston is very good defensively and use their sticks well. They shutdown the Cindy and company convincingly- so why is this a surprise?

    • no - Jun 16, 2013 at 1:49 PM

      i don’t think it’s being positioned as a suprise, but with chicagos depth you’d like to see them at least make some quality zone entries and get a little momentum for when play returns to even strength

  2. Jackson Scofield - Jun 16, 2013 at 11:54 AM

    You don’t say?

  3. lordstanley65 - Jun 16, 2013 at 12:06 PM

    The Bs PP has sucked since we lost Savard. One more way these teams even out! Man, I love this matchup. I was hoping for Detroit at first, because they’re in our division next year and it would have made an instant rivalry, but watching these games has made me change my mind.

  4. patriotslove12 - Jun 16, 2013 at 12:14 PM

    The hawks PP was struggling coming into this Final series as well. Unfortunately for them, they are facing a monster of a penalty kill unit (with Bergeron and chara/seidenberg), and that will not change for THIS series. Compared to the Pens PP, Chicago, although they have a plethora of top-end talent and scorers, is clearly a downgrade. I don’t see the hawks luck on the PP changing that much during THIS series.

  5. nyrnashty - Jun 16, 2013 at 12:20 PM

    Can’t blame the pp. This isn’t the regular season 5-5 hockey is where it’s at in the layoffs. Plus the Boston penalty kill has been amazing give them credit don’t blame Chicago!

  6. nyrnashty - Jun 16, 2013 at 12:21 PM


  7. kcprof926 - Jun 16, 2013 at 1:09 PM

    Hawks power play has been an issue for three years. One they never win the draw after the penalty is scored . Two they have horrible entries and only one defenseman that can bring the puck in, Leddy. Three they look for the perfect pass and goal. I would put Hammer on the point because he as the best shot and stop using forwards at the point. Boston penalty kill is good but Hawks are making it easier on them.

  8. howdydoodyisalive - Jun 16, 2013 at 8:04 PM

    For those claiming that it isn’t the Chicago pp that is the issue, please double check your math. They are 0-6 against Boston. They haven’t scored in 15 straight pp’s. That means they didn’t score in their last nine against Detroit. Certainly sounds like an issue with the Chicago pp to me.

  9. auggie1955 - Jun 17, 2013 at 2:45 PM

    Not to take anything away from the Bruins D, but the Hawks PP has sucked all season no matter who they were playing. The Hawks are constantly trying to set up that picture perfect goal and are always guilty of not 1 pass too many, but 2 or 3 passes too many. The play gets broken up and the puck gets cleared. Instead they just need to get the puck to the net.

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kane (1382)
  2. P. Kessel (1327)
  3. M. Boedker (1199)
  4. R. McDonagh (1124)
  5. S. Matthias (1110)