Blackhawks at Midseason: Progress Analysis

The Chicago Blackhawks reached the midpoint of the schedule Saturday with a shootout win that also served as a snapshot of where this team is right now. The Blackhawks had little time to pause before welcoming Vegas the next night, but the 41-game mark offers a useful moment to assess their overall direction.

The standings still place Chicago near the bottom of the league, yet the broader picture shows steady forward movement. The gains may not be enough to spark playoff talk, but the team has taken measurable steps compared to earlier stages of this rebuild, and the data backs that up.

At 16-18-7 and 39 points entering Sunday, the Blackhawks sat third from the bottom of the NHL standings. Even so, that total reflects tangible progress, putting them well ahead of their pace from recent seasons and reinforcing the sense that this group is slowly moving in the right direction.

Below is a breakdown of the numbers and what they reveal.

BLACKHAWKS TEAM STATS

STAT	2024-25	2025-26
GP	41	41
W	14	16
L	25	18
OT	2	7
P	30	39
GF	104	113
GF/GP	2.54	2.76
GA	138	129
GA/GP	3.37	3.15
PP%	23.1	21.6
PK%	83.9	83.7
SHOT/GP	25.4	25.2
SA/GP	30.3	30.0
FOW%	44.2	46.4

STAT /	2024-25	2025-26
5v5 GF	69	69
5v5 GA	98	94
GF P1	36	28
GF P2	30	38
GF P3	37	46
GF OT	1	1
GA P1	40	33
GA P2	40	46
GA P3	56	46
GA OT	2	2
PEN DRAWN	125	147
PEN TAKEN	140	167
NET PEN	-15	-20
MINOR P	122	140
SHOOTING %	10.0	10.9

What the Numbers Really Say About the Blackhawks’ Progress

When you look past the standings and dig into the data, the Chicago Blackhawks’ evolution from 2024–25 to 2025–26 becomes much clearer. This is still a rebuilding team, but the numbers show real progress in structure, game management, and special teams, even if one major issue continues to hold them back.

Overall Results Show Growth

The Blackhawks have taken a measurable step forward year over year.

Through the same number of games, Chicago improved from 14 wins and 30 points to 16 wins and 39 points. Offensively, they are producing more (104 goals to 113), while defensively they are giving up fewer (138 down to 129). Goals per game increased from 2.54 to 2.76, while goals against per game dropped from 3.37 to 3.15.

That combination matters. It points to a team that is becoming more competitive on a nightly basis, even if the win-loss record still reflects a work in progress.

Five-on-Five: Defensive Gains, Offensive Stagnation

At five-on-five, the numbers tell a mixed story.

Chicago scored 69 goals at 5v5 in both seasons, showing no offensive growth at even strength. However, goals against at 5v5 dropped from 98 to 94, which is a meaningful defensive improvement.

This highlights the core issue. The Blackhawks are defending better at even strength, but the lack of offensive growth at 5v5 remains the biggest obstacle preventing a bigger jump in the standings.

Period Breakdown: Stronger Finishes, Better Late-Game Play

The period-by-period data reveals an important shift in how the Blackhawks are playing games.

Goals For by Period

• 1st Period: 36 → 28
• 2nd Period: 30 → 38
• 3rd Period: 37 → 46

Chicago is scoring far more goals late in games. That suggests improved conditioning, confidence, and execution when it matters most.

Goals Against by Period

• 1st Period: 40 → 33
• 2nd Period: 40 → 46
• 3rd Period: 56 → 46

The most encouraging number here is the third period. Last season, the Blackhawks struggled badly late, allowing 56 goals in the third. This season, that number dropped to 46, a significant improvement that reflects better structure, discipline, and defensive awareness.

Penalties: More Aggression, Still Undisciplined

The penalty data shows a more assertive team, but also one that still struggles with discipline.

• Penalties Drawn: 125 → 147
• Penalties Taken: 140 → 167
• Net Penalties: -15 → -20

Chicago is forcing opponents into more penalties, which is positive. However, they are also taking too many themselves, often negating that advantage. This is typical of a young team learning how to play aggressively without crossing the line.

Special Teams Continue to Carry the Team

Power Play: Efficient Despite Poor Analytics

The power play remains a strength.

Chicago ranked in the upper half of the league last season, and they are on pace to do so again with a 21.6% success rate, currently 11th in the NHL. Net-front execution and finishing continue to drive results, even though analytics paint an ugly picture.

Shot-based metrics place the Blackhawks near the bottom of the league in power-play volume, but this unit continues to convert chances at a high rate. It’s not pretty, but it’s effective.

Penalty Kill: Truly Elite

The penalty kill is even more impressive.

Chicago sits at 83.7%, tied for third in the NHL. This success is backed by the numbers: the Blackhawks allow very few shots and scoring chances while shorthanded. The structure and pressure within the system are working exactly as intended, making the penalty kill one of the team’s most reliable assets.

Possession and Execution Trends

The Hawks are not generating more offense through volume, but they are becoming more efficient.

• Shots per game: essentially unchanged
• Shots against per game: slightly down
• Shooting percentage: up from 10.0% to 10.9%
• Faceoff percentage: improved from 44.2% to 46.4%

These numbers suggest better execution, improved puck management, and more success in key moments, even if overall possession remains an issue.

The Big Picture

All the data points to the same conclusion:

The Blackhawks are improving defensively, managing games better, and leaning heavily on strong special teams. However, five-on-five scoring remains the missing piece.

If Chicago can find even league-average offense at even strength while maintaining elite penalty killing and a productive power play, the next step in the rebuild will become very real. Until then, the progress is there — but it’s incomplete.

Blackhawks Players

NAME		SEASON	GP	G	A	PTS	+/-
C.	Bedard	2024-25	41	11	26	37	-16
		2025-26	31	19	25	44	8
T.	Bertuzzi	2024-25	41	14	8	22	-18
		2025-26	38	19	12	31	-12
A.	Burakovsky	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	36	9	17	26	-11
F.	Nazar	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	33	6	15	21	-7
T.	Teravainen	2024-25	41	7	19	26	-12
		2025-26	40	9	11	20	-10
A.	Levshunov	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	39	2	17	19	-13
R.	Donato	2024-25	39	11	11	22	-5
		2025-26	41	10	8	18	-10
R.	Greene	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	41	4	10	14	-1
I.	Mikheyev	2024-25	39	8	5	13	5
		2025-26	37	8	5	13	-4
L.	Crevier	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	40	3	9	12	2
O.	Moore	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	29	3	8	11	-5
W.	Kaiser	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	41	4	5	9	0
J.	Dickinson	2024-25	41	7	6	13	-5
		2025-26	28	4	4	8	-5
A.	Vlasic	2024-25	41	2	15	17	-11
		2025-26	40	2	6	8	-13
S.	Rinzel	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	28	1	7	8	0
M.	Grzelcyk	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	41	0	8	8	1
C.	Dach	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	41	3	4	7	-15
N.	Foligno	2024-25	40	10	7	17	-16
		2025-26	19	1	6	7	0
C.	Murphy	2024-25	38	1	12	13	-4
		2025-26	41	0	6	6	-6
L.	Reichel	2024-25	35	3	8	11	-7
		2025-26	5	2	2	4	1
N	Lardis	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	10	2	0	2	-2
S.	Lafferty	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	17	1	1	2	2
L.	Slaggert	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	15	1	1	2	2
D.	Toninato	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	5	0	1	1	1
E.	Del Mastro	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	2	0	0	0	-1

What the Player Numbers Tell Us: Who’s Improving, Who’s Stalling, and What It Means for the Blackhawks

When you compare individual player stats from 2024–25 to 2025–26, a clear pattern emerges for the Chicago Blackhawks. Some players are taking meaningful steps forward, others are holding steady in defined roles, and a few are showing signs of regression or usage-related decline. This is exactly what a rebuilding roster looks like at this stage.

Clear Steps Forward

Connor Bedard

Bedard’s progression jumps off the page. He went from 37 points in 41 games to 44 points in 31 games, improving his points-per-game rate significantly. His +/- swing from -16 to +8 is just as important as the scoring. It shows better defensive engagement, improved support, and stronger overall team play when he’s on the ice. This is franchise-player growth.

Tyler Bertuzzi

Bertuzzi’s offensive impact has increased noticeably. He improved from 22 points to 31 points, and his goal total jumped from 14 to 19 despite playing fewer games. While his plus-minus remains negative, his value is clear: net-front scoring, power-play production, and physical presence. His numbers reflect exactly the role he was brought in to play.

Frank Nazar

Nazar’s first real NHL sample shows promise. With 21 points in 33 games, he’s producing at a respectable rate for a young forward adjusting to the league. His minus rating reflects team context more than individual play. The offensive instincts are there, and the production supports continued top-nine usage.

Artyom Levshunov

Levshunov’s 19 points in 39 games as a young defenseman is encouraging. The minus rating is expected given usage and matchups. What matters is puck movement, offensive confidence, and minutes played — all trending in the right direction.

Holding Value, Holding the Line

Teuvo Teravainen

Teravainen’s numbers dipped slightly from 26 points to 20, but his role hasn’t changed. He remains a stabilizer — a player who drives possession, supports younger linemates, and plays in all situations. This is less regression and more role consistency on a weaker offensive team.

Ryan Donato

Donato’s production dropped from 22 to 18 points, but he continues to fill a middle-six role effectively. His usage has changed, and his numbers reflect that. He remains a useful, versatile forward rather than a primary scorer.

Ilya Mikheyev

Mikheyev’s point totals stayed flat (13 points in both seasons), but his impact goes well beyond the scoresheet. His defensive work, speed, and penalty killing are reflected in the team’s elite PK numbers. This is a classic example of value that raw scoring doesn’t fully capture.

Defensive Role Players Doing Their Job

Louis Crevier, Wyatt Kaiser, Matt Grzelcyk

These defensemen are not here to score — and their numbers reflect that. What matters is minutes, structure, and execution. Crevier’s +2 and Grzelcyk’s +1 show reliability. This is functional depth, which rebuilding teams desperately need.

Alex Vlasic

Vlasic’s offensive drop (17 points to 8) stands out, but context matters. He’s playing tougher minutes, more defensive-zone starts, and harder matchups. His numbers suggest a shift toward a shutdown role rather than an offensive one.

Warning Signs, Usage Reality, and Context That Matters

Nick Foligno

Foligno’s production dropped from 17 points to 7, but the numbers don’t tell the full story without context. Injuries limited his availability, and his role has become more specialized. At this stage of his career, this type of decline is expected. His value now lies more in leadership, physical presence, and situational usage than in offensive output. While the on-ice impact has diminished, his influence in the room remains important.

Jason Dickinson

Dickinson’s dip from 13 points to 8 is also tied directly to context. Injuries disrupted his rhythm, and his role shifted further toward defensive responsibility. He continues to be effective away from the puck, but offensive production is no longer a defining part of his game. His numbers reflect usage, not a lack of effort or effectiveness.

Role Players Doing Exactly What’s Asked

Connor Murphy

Murphy should not be viewed as a declining player. His offense dropping from 13 points to 6 is a byproduct of role, not regression. As a third-pairing defenseman, he has provided steady minutes, physicality, and leadership. His usage is controlled, his expectations are clear, and in that role, he has been effective. This is a case of a veteran fitting properly into the lineup rather than falling behind.

Small-Sample Positives and Depth Contributions

Nick Lardis

Lardis has only played a handful of games, but the early signs are encouraging. He has already shown a high-end shot and natural offensive instincts. It’s far too early to draw conclusions, but the tools are evident. For now, the takeaway is simple: the offensive upside is real, and the foundation is there.

Slaggert, Lafferty, and Toninato

These three players should be evaluated together. They fill depth roles built on forechecking, pace, and effort, not scoring. Their production is modest, but that’s not the primary expectation. They help establish structure, pressure opposing defenses, and give the coaching staff reliable minutes in specific situations.

Ethan Del Mastro

Del Mastro has only appeared in a few games, making any statistical evaluation premature. What matters at this stage is exposure, adjustment, and comfort at the NHL level. His presence is about development, not immediate results.

Blackhawks Goalies

NAME		SEASON	GP	W	L	T	OT	SV%	GAA
Petr	Mrazek	2024-25	25	8	15	0	1	0.895	3.17
		2025-26	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Arvid	Soderblom	2024-25	18	6	10	0	1	0.905	2.92
		2025-26	13	4	7	0	1	0.873	4.02
Drew	Commesso	2024-25	2	0	1	0	0	0.846	3.36
		2025-26	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Spencer	Knight	2024-25	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
		2025-26	29	12	11	0	6	0.910	2.60

Goaltending: Two Extremes, One Average Result

Goaltending has been one of the more fascinating — and revealing — storylines for the Blackhawks this season. On the surface, Chicago ranks 15th in team save percentage, right at the NHL average. But when you dig deeper, it becomes clear how they got there.

The league-wide save percentage has dipped to .898, its lowest point since 1996, and the Blackhawks sit almost exactly at that mark. That middle-of-the-pack ranking isn’t the result of steady goaltending across the board — it’s the product of two completely opposite performances essentially canceling each other out.

Spencer Knight: Elite Impact in the First Half

Even though he wasn’t with the organization long-term, Spencer Knight’s first half of the season was outstanding. In 29 games, Knight posted a .910 save percentage with a 2.60 GAA, consistently keeping the Blackhawks competitive in games where they were often outplayed.

Leaguewide context makes his performance even more impressive. Among 64 qualifying NHL goaltenders, Knight’s .910 SV% ranks tied for 16th, while his +10.6 goals saved above average (GSAA) ranks seventh. Those are not middle-tier numbers — they’re upper-echelon results.

Night after night, Knight gave the Hawks a chance to win. He erased breakdowns, stabilized the team during rough stretches, and often prevented games from getting away early. Without his play, Chicago’s overall numbers — and likely their points total — would look much worse.

Arvid Söderblom: Struggles in a Difficult Role

On the other side of the spectrum sits Arvid Söderblom. In 13 games, Söderblom posted a .873 save percentage and a 4.02 GAA, numbers that place him near the bottom of the league.

Among the same group of 64 qualifying goaltenders, Söderblom’s save percentage ranks 61st, and his –9.8 GSAA ranks 59th. Those numbers reflect how difficult his starts have been — and how often small mistakes turned into goals against.

Context matters here. Söderblom has frequently played behind a young, inconsistent defensive group, often in tough situations. Still, the results show that he struggled to provide the same level of stability, and those performances pulled the team’s overall goaltending metrics back toward league average.

The Big Picture

Put simply, Knight’s strong play and Söderblom’s struggles have offset each other.

Knight elevated the position and masked team flaws. Söderblom, still developing and learning at the NHL level, had a season where the numbers were hard to overcome. The result is a team save percentage that looks average on paper but was achieved through two very different paths.

For Chicago, the takeaway is clear: when the Blackhawks receive above-average goaltending, they can stay competitive even while rebuilding. When they don’t, the margin for error disappears quickly.

Goaltending hasn’t sunk the season — but it hasn’t carried it consistently either. The contrast between Knight and Söderblom explains exactly why.

Final Thought: Context Matters — and the Second Half Will Define the Direction

The first half of the season needs to be viewed through the right lens. Injuries to Connor Bedard and Frank Nazar disrupted momentum and lineup continuity at key moments, and the schedule didn’t help. Back-to-back games have been especially difficult for the Blackhawks, exposing a thin roster and a lack of depth that is expected at this stage of the rebuild. Those factors matter when evaluating both the results and the performance.

Despite those challenges, there have been clear signs of progress. The team is more structured defensively, special teams remain a strength, and several young players are beginning to establish themselves at the NHL level. The foundation is stronger than it was a year ago, even if the standings don’t fully reflect it.

The second half of the season will be shaped largely by the trade deadline. With more than seven pending unrestricted free agents, Chicago will face important decisions about moving veterans, acquiring future assets, and opening more opportunities for younger players. How those moves unfold will directly impact ice time, roles, and development.

That’s where the real focus should be. The remainder of the season is about growth — both as a team and individually. Players like Oliver Moore, Frank Nazar, Artyom Levshunov, and Ryan Greene will be under the microscope as they take on larger responsibilities. Their progression will matter far more than short-term wins or losses.

The big question isn’t where the Blackhawks finish in the standings. It’s whether they can continue to play meaningful, competitive games after the trade deadline, even as the roster evolves. If they do, it will be a strong indicator that the rebuild is on track.

In the end, success this season won’t be measured by points alone. It will be measured by development, structure, and whether this group leaves the season closer to being a competitive NHL team than it was when it began.

KEEP READING: 

Blackhawks Weekly Recap: (Week 1)

Blackhawks Weekly Recap (Week 2)

Blackhawks Weekly Recap (Week 3)

Blackhawks Weekly Recap (Week 4)

Blackhawks Weekly Recap (Week 5)

Blackhawks Weekly Recap (Week 6)

Blackhawks Week in Review:Week 7

Blackhawks Week in Recap (Week 8)

Blackhawks Week In Review: (Week 9)

Blackhawks Week In Review: (Week 10)

Blackhawks Week In Review: (Week 11)

Hawks Week In Review: Week 12

Hawks Week In Review: Week 13

Blackhawks October Report Card

Blackhawks: November Report Card

Looking for discussion? Check out our forums section and weigh in on what’s happening around the NHL!