I think Anaheim was lucky as well, if Seabrook doesn't make a bone headed play they never get their first goal. Regardless I thought last night was actually a really good hockey team between 2 of the best in the NHL. Sometime the bounces go your way and sometimes they don't, last night was a case of the latter. I still think there were some really good signs from last night's game. The team is playing more physical, the younger guys are actually starting to mature and look like they belong and Crawford continues to have a nice bounce back season.

However I will pile on and say that the PP is once again garbage. This needs to be fixed asap, the Hawks have way too much talent to be struggling this much. When they scored on the PP yesterday I believe it was the 2nd unit (someone correct me if I'm wrong). Also like I said last night, Hossa needs to get going again and Sharp/Seabrook need to stop playing like garbage.

Last but not least there is no way the War room calls Saad's goal a goal if they are not 100% sure that it is indeed a goal. According to the rules, the puck crossed the line before the net was totally dislodged so it was a goal. Even if you disagree it makes up for his goal in Vancouver that was disallowed by a way too early whistle.

Oh, I have finally upgraded my top 210 Mock drdaft and profiles at
www.Draftsite.com/NHL

I watched and really strong hockey game. I liked the entire game by both teams.

I saw lots of hits.

I saw two bigger goalies take up lots of space, but it would be insulting not to say they both played excellent.
Crawford actually showed some real glove. And I am impressed how well Crawford when down in the butterfly has shown he still can use his leg pads almost like paddles..

Fasth showed composure and squared up and stayed calm and resloved.


This is a PP where new things are being tried and to a large extent the players have been allowed to free style and continually vary what they try to do.

I see that they are working hard to establish the presence in front.

Last night, there was less motion than the game before.
A lot of shots were on Fasth and 'handled by the Ducks."

Anytime I see Kane not on the right wing half boards, I feel they are not at their best; he just seems more "instinctual" there

I am starting to think Sharp and Kane both like the biscuit so much that they are getting in each other's way.

I thought Roszival had a few moments where he made poor decisions, but understood, completely why Brookbank wasn't lined up against the old mates thsi first game.

Isn't it nice that the hawks actually has a newer draftee who is ABLE to power to the front with power?
Eventually Saad has got to get a bit more touch to receive the passes, but I continue to be surprised that this is the same kid from a year ago...

I think that when you let your heavy skilled team play the way the hawks do, the chances won't always dicated to bundles of goals.

Not pulling the panic button, but Ducks have added some quicker guys, have super old guys, and still play hard up & down the frontlines.

Expect this type team play to be what the hawks and all teams will face in the playoffs.

But there won't be any dumb shoot out them.

...and your top forwards won't be dicating their ice time in OT, either.

Gotta love how they are playing regardless of the fact they haven't signed a OT shooter/specialist.

When the shootout was about to start I only wondered was one of the Hawk forwards gonna just let loose a blast instead of faking to the goalmouth.
I think that might have shook Fasth up.

Not to speak for Wiz but I think teams probably aren't trading good players right now because most teams think they are in the playoff hunt so most would be buyers instead of sellers.
- jhawk159

First of all, the term ‘Good Players’ could mean anything, and nothing. I know for a fact that a player on a certain NHL team is actively being offered around the league. I don’t think he is what the Hawks need but I know he has been advised that this team is trying to move him. I also know from 2 well connected people I know that there are on-going talks all the time about player availability. It is possible no deals will take place now but not with the certainty Wiz is trying to convey.

Two things nobody talked about,

1st, the ref never whistled the play dead. The puck was loose the whole time.

2nd, the ref/replay officials can determine if the goal falling off played any role in goal going in. It is obvious that the momentum of the puck was still going in, even in slow motion. They never played a real time replay, with the whistle, which would likely have shown the puck over the line before the whistle blew...
- TrueGrit

Sbisa covered the puck and actually moved it back in the other direction, well before it crossed the line. the puck went over the line concurrent with or after the goal coming up off the ice. Nothing's changed since last night. Hawks got lucky.

Another thing is if the war room ruled it as a goal then there is zero doubt it was a goal. I have seen some of the video that the war room is privy too and the TV feeds don't have the angles, clarity or the ability to slow down and zoom in like they do.
- paulr

Not doubting you on this, but if this is true, why wouldn't the War Room release to the broadcast the replay angle that they feel confirmed their decision? Why not shut the critics up and lend some more credibility to the critical calls they are making?

I can't remember if it was post-game or during intermission, but they showed a great angle that it was clearly a goal. Puck was over the line before net came off. Also, I think teams practice shoot-outs so Q sees who is good and bad. Unfortunately it doesn't always translate during an actual game. I agree, though about trying guys like Kruger and Frolik. Hossa and Sharp suck. Stalberg hasn't been that good. Lastly, try to get Ryan O'reilly. Even their beat writer says he won't be back with the Avs.

1) I think Anaheim was lucky as well, if Seabrook doesn't make a bone headed play they never get their first goal. Regardless I thought last night was actually a really good hockey team between 2 of the best in the NHL. Sometime the bounces go your way and sometimes they don't, last night was a case of the latter. I still think there were some really good signs from last night's game. The team is playing more physical, the younger guys are actually starting to mature and look like they belong and Crawford continues to have a nice bounce back season.

However I will pile on and say that the PP is once again garbage. This needs to be fixed asap, the Hawks have way too much talent to be struggling this much. When they scored on the PP yesterday I believe it was the 2nd unit (someone correct me if I'm wrong). Also like I said last night, Hossa needs to get going again and Sharp/Seabrook need to stop playing like garbage.

2) Last but not least there is no way the War room calls Saad's goal a goal if they are not 100% sure that it is indeed a goal. According to the rules, the puck crossed the line before the net was totally dislodged so it was a goal. Even if you disagree it makes up for his goal in Vancouver that was disallowed by a way too early whistle.
- dan9189

1) True.
2) Not true. They suck.

JJ: I'm not sure why you're so adamant that Saad's goal wasn't a goal? The play wasn't whistled dead and was loose the whole time. There was an angle on the TV feed that showed puck crossed the line as the goal posts were riding up their moorings, but had not come completely off of them.

Not doubting you on this, but if this is true, why wouldn't the War Room release to the broadcast the replay angle that they feel confirmed their decision? Why not shut the critics up and lend some more credibility to the critical calls they are making?
- Ogilthorpe2

Teams do have access to these videos. Too bad the public didn't

Not trying to argue with you guys but the Ducks lost a win a few seasons back when a goal was waived off by the "War Room" in exactly the same scenario. The explanation for that game was the net was not seated down and had been pushed up even though the pegs were still their holes (just like last night).

The video they showed on the Ducks feed with the explanation from Toronto was the side angle shot where the Ref was standing. IMO you could not see it cross the line.

I would bet a lot of cash the Ducks would never get that call.

My problem as it always is with the NHL is they are not consistent in anything they do. Goal reviews, punishment or calls. It is pretty pathetic.

You guys have a great team and it was and it was a fun game. Hopefully we can do it all again in the Conference Finals!

Back to standing around on the PP I see. The only person who moves is Kane, and the other team is figuring out that if you dont draw out to Kane nothing opens up.

Perimeter passes, alllllll night long.

We had a 4 on 3 for what, a total of 3+ minutes last night?
- FourFeathers773

This. The Hawks were waiting for something to open up all night. Nothing did.
They'd better realize that patience is a virtue, until you need to make your own luck.. That didn't even come close to happening last night.

I can't remember if it was post-game or during intermission, but they showed a great angle that it was clearly a goal. Puck was over the line before net came off. Also, I think teams practice shoot-outs so Q sees who is good and bad. Unfortunately it doesn't always translate during an actual game. I agree, though about trying guys like Kruger and Frolik. Hossa and Sharp suck. Stalberg hasn't been that good. Lastly, try to get Ryan O'reilly. Even their beat writer says he won't be back with the Avs.
- tomcat24

I didn't see that angle. But I concede it is possible.

Stalberg does two things that could have beaten Fasth, goes fast to his backhand AND gets the puck up. The only way he was getting beaten low was thru the 5 hole, and just barely by Toews.

Not trying to argue with you guys but the Ducks lost a win a few seasons back when a goal was waived off by the "War Room" in exactly the same scenario. The explanation for that game was the net was not seated down and had been pushed up even though the pegs were still their holes (just like last night).

The video they showed on the Ducks feed with the explanation from Toronto was the side angle shot where the Ref was standing. IMO you could not see it cross the line.

I would bet a lot of cash the Ducks would never get that call.

My problem as it always is with the NHL is they are not consistent in anything they do. Goal reviews, punishment or calls. It is pretty pathetic.

You guys have a great team and it was and it was a fun game. Hopefully we can do it all again in the Conference Finals!
- H.E.Pennypacker

100% agreed. It is, and has been, the Mickey Mouse Club. It might have been a goal, Not having seen the replay angle just alluded to, I have zero faith in Toronto.

JJ: I'm not sure why you're so adamant that Saad's goal wasn't a goal? The play wasn't whistled dead and was loose the whole time. The puck crossed the line as the goal posts were riding up their moorings, but had not come completely off of them.
- Holes02

I did not see that. Concede it is possible. But I did not see that. Looked to me like the puck crossed th eline when the goal was clear.

One angle definitely showed puck crossing the line with the mooring in or barely off the ice.

26.2 Infractions – When Goalkeeper is On the Ice – A goal will be awarded when an attacking player, in the act of shooting the puck into the goal (between the normal position of the posts and completely across the goal line), is prevented from scoring as a result of a defending player or goalkeeper displacing the goal post, either deliberately or accidentally.

That too. It was a goal. It's in the rules and why Toronto reviews plays. Saying it was lucky is silly. He smoked that defender, got tripped and either the puck crossed in time or the defender knocked the goal off. Either way count it.

Not a lucky point either. Are you kidding me. What an absurd statement. I suppose the Ducks were lucky to get a point since a puck bounced awkwardly off of Seabrook's stick. Even game, great play by Crawford. As the great Steve McManaman would say "both teams battled and deservedly so earned a point" In this case the Ducks won the coin toss and got an extra one. Oh darn.

Next. Good thing that dude stuck up for Getzlaf, deterred Bickell from hitting anyone else and inspired the penalty kill to negate the instigator... Oh wait Leddy scored on a bomb and Bickell continued to rail opposing players the rest of the game. Stupid penalty, stupid fight, and big up to the Hawks for making them pay.

Well written JJ & right on.
I was at the game last nightand boy were there alot of koolaid drinkers in the concourse. Rocky must have made a lot of $$ on black hawk koolaid !
Agree, yes the streak is nice , but as i have said before, teams will start rampin it up shortly! same crap as always, world class skaters, too cute at times, not enough "ASS" in the corners & in front of the nets for "Dirty" goals!
the power play is terrible " thank you kompon!" about another week they'll be singin " woa,woa woa, jamie"s cryin!" no front of the net presence! 4 God Darn minutes of PP in the end and ZIPPO!!
this summer you had guys like Marc Crawford out there who were stanley cup winning coaches before who I am sure wouldn't mind a break and would welcome just being an assistant ,there for the taking and Q comes up with THIS! he already has 1 stiff behind the bench, now he has 2!
On the positive side JJ, I hope the bells are finally ringing in Brian Bickell's head, another strong game by him! if this keeps up , i'm gonna have to get a Bickell 29 jersey! the kid has talent, i think his agent might have said something to him like , "hey kid, carcillo is coming back soon, he's GONNA play somewhere, also, i'm trying to get you some decent $$$ , so get your ASS IN GEAR!"
JJ , as far as the $$ part of the game, both 29 & 25 are up for renewel. if 29 can play all the time like he has been, he could be more useful then "the flyin walenda,25" out there, who only seems to score against the Jackets! SB ain't gonna keep both of them. with kids comin soon, I think right now Bowman is tryin to decide which one to sign or put out there as part of a trade package to get the "elusive #2 center." agree?? yes/no? right now I gotta say Bickell is makin a good case to stay with his Grit! you already have enough Peggy Flemings on the team , so i gotta think Stalberg may be the 1 who gets dangled out there.
also. CC ,"keep it up kid, Roberto , may just have to pick another city with high end pizza places to play in!"
Finally another good game by "the pizza man!" no freebies last night & I like the way that kid skates !!
- wonthecup10

Can we get a definition of Kool-aid drinker? You were surprised to see people at the Hawk game that are not dyed in the wool hockey die-hards? Why are they kool-aid drinkers? I thought the kool-aid drinkers were the ones on this board that don't villify everything the Hawks do. Now the average fan in the UC is considered a sheep?

Should the Hawks have hockey aptitude tests for people before they are allowed to buy tickets? I don't get the need to point out that a professional sports team is a business and that the owner desires to make money as well as win.

Do the self-appointed "popes of football" on Bears' message boards mock the people that pay a lot of money to tailgate and see games in person at Soldier?

1) True.
2) Not true. They suck.
- John Jaeckel

I'm in the minority then because I thought it was a goal even before they called it a goal. We'll agree to disagree.

Teams do have access to these videos. Too bad the public didn't
- paulr

If the league/war room is privy to replay angles that the fans are not, and if the league/war room is using these angles to make game altering decisions...well that would be yet one more example of why this league just doesn't get it.

I did not see that. Concede it is possible. But I did not see that. Looked to me like the puck crossed the line when the goal was clear.
- John Jaeckel

TV feed showed an angle where the puck is clearly across the line but the goal moorings are still in contact with both the posts and the ice. Per 78.4, that's a good goal.

Oh, I have finally upgraded my top 210 Mock drdaft and profiles at
www.Draftsite.com/NHL

I watched and really strong hockey game. I liked the entire game by both teams.

I saw lots of hits.

I saw two bigger goalies take up lots of space, but it would be insulting not to say they both played excellent.
Crawford actually showed some real glove. And I am impressed how well Crawford when down in the butterfly has shown he still can use his leg pads almost like paddles..

Fasth showed composure and squared up and stayed calm and resloved.


This is a PP where new things are being tried and to a large extent the players have been allowed to free style and continually vary what they try to do.

I see that they are working hard to establish the presence in front.

Last night, there was less motion than the game before.
A lot of shots were on Fasth and 'handled by the Ducks."

Anytime I see Kane not on the right wing half boards, I feel they are not at their best; he just seems more "instinctual" there

I am starting to think Sharp and Kane both like the biscuit so much that they are getting in each other's way.

I thought Roszival had a few moments where he made poor decisions, but understood, completely why Brookbank wasn't lined up against the old mates thsi first game.

Isn't it nice that the hawks actually has a newer draftee who is ABLE to power to the front with power?
Eventually Saad has got to get a bit more touch to receive the passes, but I continue to be surprised that this is the same kid from a year ago...

I think that when you let your heavy skilled team play the way the hawks do, the chances won't always dicated to bundles of goals.

Not pulling the panic button, but Ducks have added some quicker guys, have super old guys, and still play hard up & down the frontlines.

Expect this type team play to be what the hawks and all teams will face in the playoffs.

But there won't be any dumb shoot out them.

...and your top forwards won't be dicating their ice time in OT, either.

Gotta love how they are playing regardless of the fact they haven't signed a OT shooter/specialist.

When the shootout was about to start I only wondered was one of the Hawk forwards gonna just let loose a blast instead of faking to the goalmouth.
I think that might have shook Fasth up.
- wiz1901

Agreed on all bolded points. The shootout is a gimmick and it sucks, but it's how points are getting decided. Anyone assuming the Hawks will just cruise to a top 3 seed, might be disappointed. Points matter. Got to have guys out there who are your best SO shooters. Maybe Saad has more than he showed last night. But whoever #3 is, you need that guy to be more than just a guess.

TV feed showed an angle where the puck is clearly across the line but the goal moorings are still in contact with both the posts and the ice. Per 78.4, that's a good goal.
- Holes02

Do you have it tivo'ed? Would love to see it.

I'm in the minority then because I thought it was a goal even before they called it a goal. We'll agree to disagree.
- dan9189

And you disagree with both sets of announcers (for Chicago, not to mention Anaheim).

I concede there might be a replay angle that shows it was a goal. However, I haven't seen it yet.

Can someone please help me understand why Sharpie was on the point on that power play in OT?!? He is the most snake bit guy in the league and yet is rewarded with PP time in a crucial situation. Would have much rather seen Keith or Leddy opposite big Hoss in that situation. And JJ, you hit it on the head--Kompon is Q's guy. This power play is looking exactly like last year--no movement, stand still, station to station b.s. Very frustrating to watch!

One angle definitely showed puck crossing the line with the mooring in or barely off the ice.

26.2 Infractions – When Goalkeeper is On the Ice – A goal will be awarded when an attacking player, in the act of shooting the puck into the goal (between the normal position of the posts and completely across the goal line), is prevented from scoring as a result of a defending player or goalkeeper displacing the goal post, either deliberately or accidentally.

That too. It was a goal. It's in the rules and why Toronto reviews plays. Saying it was lucky is silly. He smoked that defender, got tripped and either the puck crossed in time or the defender knocked the goal off. Either way count it.

Not a lucky point either. Are you kidding me. What an absurd statement. I suppose the Ducks were lucky to get a point since a puck bounced awkwardly off of Seabrook's stick. Even game, great play by Crawford. As the great Steve McManaman would say "both teams battled and deservedly so earned a point" In this case the Ducks won the coin toss and got an extra one. Oh darn.

Next. Good thing that dude stuck up for Getzlaf, deterred Bickell from hitting anyone else and inspired the penalty kill to negate the instigator... Oh wait Leddy scored on a bomb and Bickell continued to rail opposing players the rest of the game. Stupid penalty, stupid fight, and big up to the Hawks for making them pay.
- fattybeef

Yeah, well, before you do too extensive a victory dance here. What set up the whole thing? A big, clean hit. Weren't you saying here yesterday that sort of thing doesn't really matter?

Though the rest of the point is well taken.

I did not see the puck cross the line with the goal still attached. Nor did like eight announcers/analysts. I do concede that it is possible. I just haven't seen the replay yet that shows it (to me).

Someone post the video where we can see the puck across the line and the mooring stioll attached. Until then, there is still an argument it was a lucky point—because the goal was at best questionable. As "absurd" as you want to say it is.

Agreed on all bolded points. The shootout is a gimmick and it sucks, but it's how points are getting decided. Anyone assuming the Hawks will just cruise to a top 3 seed, might be disappointed. Points matter. Got to have guys out there who are your best SO shooters. Maybe Saad has more than he showed last night. But whoever #3 is, you need that guy to be more than just a guess.
- John Jaeckel

To your point in your blog, I'm really surprised Kruger hasn't gotten a shot. He has those slick, quick hands that can react to what the goalie gives up. We've seen it in games. Even Bolland has shown the ability to beat the goalie in unfettered scenarios. Surprised he hasn't gotten more of a look too.