Breaking Down the Blackhawks’ Forecheck: A Closer Look at Sorensen’s Tactics
A dive into Anders Sorensen's forecheck tactics in the Blackhawks 7-4 win over Philadelphia.
I’ve been pretty critical of Anders Sorensen’s forechecking recently.
Let’s get one thing clear. I guarantee that Sorensen knows more about hockey than I ever hope to dream of. That said, what fun would it be as a fan if we couldn’t overanalyze meaningless games?
Yesterday, March 23, the Blackhawks snapped a seven-game losing streak and won 7-4 over the Philadelphia Flyers. You can read my recap in the link below.
Yesterday was the perfect opportunity to see how Sorensen responds with a three-goal lead. Would he run every line with conservative tactics? Would he let Connor Bedard and Frank Nazar play in a system that fostered offense?
The second period starts tied 3-3 and the Blackhawks need to be aggressive on the forecheck to establish offensive zone (OZ) pressure. The first shift has Nick Foligno (CHI17) winning the faceoff. The Hawks chip the puck in the OZ and play an aggressive 2-1-2. The Hawks finish their checks, hunt the puck, and provide support.
After the Blackhawks went up by two goals, Sorensen still had the Hawks forecheck with a 2-1-2. However, the forwards didn’t finish checks or forecheck too aggressively. The focus was taking out outlet passes and interrupting lanes instead of raining down physicality.
When the Blackhawks forechecked hard, like in the first example, the result was often shots on goal and scoring chances. When the Hawks were more passive, they let the opposition off with an easy pass into the neutral zone. Below are some more examples of the Hawks forechecking in the second period.
The Blackhawks gained a three-goal lead early in the third. In the below example, the Blackhawks initiate the 1-2-2 after a lost faceoff draw. Bedard (CHI98) pressures the puck carrier as the F1, Frank Nazar (CHI90) immediately recovers to the F3 position and Ryan Donato (CHI8) takes the half wall as the F2.
Once the three-goal lead was achieved, Sorensen relied on his bottom six for defense and limited ice time for Nazar’s line. Below you can see the Hawks’ second line in a 1-2-2 as well as the shots on goal for the period. Six for Philly, one for Chicago with six minutes to go in the period.
The result? The Blackhawks had three shots on goal in the third period, a 22% Corsi, and 20% expected goals share. Did it secure the win? Sure did. And I guess beggars can’t be choosers. But I would rather see Sorensen employ Bedard’s line in more aggressive tactics.
What does Sorensen have to lose if he runs Bedard and Nazar a little more free even with a lead? Well, his job for one, if he turns this game into a blow-out loss because the Flyers gained momentum off of a Bedard turnover, it’s not a good look for him. And that’s the thing. I would rather have a coach care more about the players than the results in a meaningless game.