The Blackhawks spent the last two days doing some serious soul-searching.

‘‘That’s what it takes at this point,’’ defenseman Seth Jones said Tuesday.

As they reach the midpoint of yet another terrible season, they’re in their deepest rut yet. They’ve lost six of their last seven games and have been blown out in four of their last five. At 13-25-2, they’re in last place in the NHL. They’re on pace for their third consecutive sub-60-point season and fifth consecutive sub-70-point season.

Robust prospect pool and promising organizational future aside, the state of things is bleak.

‘‘I’m sure it’s frustrating for the fan base,’’ captain Nick Foligno said. ‘‘Whatever they feel, it’s a thousand times worse for us.’’

So as the Hawks looked ahead to the second half of the season, which they will reach Wednesday against the Avalanche, their veteran leaders held some philosophical conversations about their team identity.

What is it? Some might say it’s losing, but the players can’t allow themselves to think like that.

‘‘Do we want to be a run-and-gun team that trades chances and scores four goals and gives up four goals a game?’’ Jones said. ‘‘Or do we want to be a hard team, a forechecking team [that plays] 1-0, 2-1, 3-1 games? We have to make that decision. A lot of people understand where we are and where we need to probably be, but we have a mixed view of how we’re playing.””

In Jones’ opinion, the low-scoring identity is more viable.

‘‘We understand that we’re not the most skilled team,’’ he said. ‘‘Everyone understands that, including the media, coaches and everyone. So we need to play a smart game and not open ourselves up. [We should] make plays when they’re there, but if there’s a chance that things are getting turned over, we can’t afford it. We can’t afford to put the pressure on the goalies time and time again.’’

But interim coach Anders Sorensen has made system changes intended to open things up somewhat. By giving players more freedom to jump into rushes and be aggressive — and also more responsibility to cover for teammates doing those things — his tactics are inherently higher-risk, higher-reward than former coach Luke Richardson’s were.

Although Sorensen’s changes were welcomed, they haven’t been very effective lately. While admitting he has struggled as much as anyone, Jones described the Hawks’ recent play as more like ‘‘high-risk, low-reward.’’

So how can the Hawks establish their desired identity within Sorensen’s system? Perhaps the bridge to doing so is a strong forecheck. When Sorensen was asked Tuesday what he thinks the Hawks’ identity should be, he mentioned the forecheck, and everyone is on board with that.

‘‘For our forwards, it’s frustrating when we’re dumping it in, dumping it in and they’re breaking it out,’’ Jones said. ‘‘We need to have a better forecheck and get pucks back that way. It starts with dumping it with a purpose, not just dumping it to the goalie and being lackadaisical.’’

Said Sorensen: ‘‘It’s hard if it’s a one-man forecheck. So [we’ve emphasized] coming up connected more in those areas, then also trying to dictate a little bit more where the puck is going.’’

Foligno used the word ‘‘tenacious’’ three times, suggesting that might be the key word produced by the identity conversations. He mentioned forechecking, too.

But he also acknowledged he and his teammates have ‘‘said a lot of things’’ all season without consistently following through on them. Now, he admitted, the ‘‘biggest thing is walking the walk,’’ although fans will remain skeptical until they see that happen.

‘‘Every guy is trying in here, that’s one thing I’ll say,’’ Foligno said. ‘‘But it’s frustrating when you’re not playing to the identity you need to play to collectively.’’