funny, are you really in a joking mood right now?
- jsabey

I dunno. I'm of two minds on the loss, and pretty much split down the middle in the broadest sense (without pretending to break down all of the minutia: the Paille/Kelly/Seguin line change, Bollig vs. Stalls et al)...

1) On the one hand, it's only one game, and the Hawks have shown resiliency all year, bouncing back from sub par performances.

2) On the other, it looked like the Hawks were intimidated, scared out of their game, which is a very, very bad sign.

They could bounce back, or the Bruins could steamroll from here. We'll have to watch the games to find out.

HNIC showed a viable explanation for the reason Chicago slowed down. The physical pounding by the Bruins is making allot of Hawks nervous, if not timid. One example was they showed was Hjalmersson taking three huge hits by Lucic, the next time Hjalmersson had the puck with Lucic bearing down on him he quickly just dumped it out into the middle of the ice right to a Bruin player.

Can the Hawks recollect themselves and take a hit to make a play of is the physical play by the Bruins going to slowly but surely wear the Hawks down and beat them into submission?
- paulr

Shh.....the speed apologists don't want to hear this.

Fact is this is exactly the series the hawks should have had against la, but la was a patchwork team held together by medical tape. Outside of Horton, Boston is healthy.

[/img]

John do you see any flaws in Rask's game that they can exploit?
- jhawk159

Not really, but I haven't seen him play that much. They need to get bodies in front of him which they failed to do last night. Any goalie can be beaten on a 2 on 1 that is well executed.

Hawk Team D is really good at using active sticks to stop or break-up teams trying to enter the zone or when they are 1st back to retrieve dump-ins. When the other team can successfully retrieve a dump-in and set up in our zone, more often than not the hawks get to running around and looking like a chinese fire drill. Boston does not. Rask really doesn't see the same quality of chances

Yep, and he's not the only one
- John Jaeckel

True and I didn't intend to make it sound that way it was just the only example they used. What worries me is Hjalmersson is one of the better Hawks at taking punishment without giving the puck away. If he is having difficulty with the hits it doesn't bode well for the rest of the team

I dunno. I'm of two minds on the loss, and pretty much split down the middle in the broadest sense (without pretending to break down all of the minutia: the Paille/Kelly/Seguin line change, Bollig vs. Stalls et al)...

1) On the one hand, it's only one game, and the Hawks have shown resiliency all year, bouncing back from sub par performances.

2) On the other, it looked like the Hawks were intimidated, scared out of their game, which is a very, very bad sign.

They could bounce back, or the Bruins could steamroll from here. We'll have to watch the games to find out.
- Tugboat

In game 3 or 4 the hawks will lose by at least 3. That blowout is coming. Question is can the hawks grind their way to a road win in the other game?

Doubtful. Not built to grind and the hawks pp won't make bruins pay when they take clutch/grab penalties.

No, I get you, but I really meant it was saveable, not that it was soft. Soft,to me says, he absolutely should have saved it. No goalie saves every one that is conceivably saveable.

Crawford has been beaten by that same basic shot the last two games—saveable but not soft. Rask hasn't.
- John Jaeckel

Fair enough and accurate. Potentially savable is certainly not the same as soft, and FWIW I agree 100% that this distinction applies on the game winner last night.

Hawk Team D is really good at using active sticks to stop or break-up teams trying to enter the zone or when they are 1st back to retrieve dump-ins. When the other team can successfully retrieve a dump-in and set up in our zone, more often than not the hawks get to running around and looking like a chinese fire drill. Boston does not. Rask really doesn't see the same quality of chances
- tomcat24

Yeahhhhh . . . I would say overall last night, Crawford saw the better chances. But, he was rocky at times, the Marchand thing he was totally bailed out by the post That uck hit the INSIDe of the post and still stayed out and that would have been a soft goal.

You can argue the refs saved Rask, and maybe they did, but how did that goal happen, the Hawks attacked the net with bodies. That, a total screen or breakaways which basically aren't happening are the only way that guy's getting beat.

True, but he wasn't last night.I believe the guy was a bit further out last night than Saad was, maybe not. Also I believe Saad's shot was higher. Minor details. But I don't think anyone was stopping Saad's. The one last night, gets saved by some goalies, including Crawford, in some situations.

They played the same in game 1, Rask was better last night. As I have been saying.
- John Jaeckel

Thanks for agreeing
Don't want to split hairs about goal tending

The series is a crap shoot and these teams are dam close
It's now a 3 of 5 and Bruins have home ice
After Wed night it will be a 2 of 3 and Hawks will have home ice
Still expecting a game 7 at the UC
Still expecting Toews to come through as he has all his life at every level including Jr,the Olympics and the NHL

I dunno. I'm of two minds on the loss, and pretty much split down the middle in the broadest sense (without pretending to break down all of the minutia: the Paille/Kelly/Seguin line change, Bollig vs. Stalls et al)...

1) On the one hand, it's only one game, and the Hawks have shown resiliency all year, bouncing back from sub par performances.

2) On the other, it looked like the Hawks were intimidated, scared out of their game, which is a very, very bad sign.

They could bounce back, or the Bruins could steamroll from here. We'll have to watch the games to find out.
- Tugboat

It is really amazing what hitting can do, isn't it? While not as juiced up as the B's and more about speed and talent I still think the Hawks have shown they can be physical like in game 1. I am with you on #2. I see a huge blowout in game 3. Something like 6-0

I said it last night and ill say it again....

Hawks are not winning this series unless they get major contributions from the pp. it's going to end in 6 and the refs, Crawford, Bolig, or stalberg will have very little to do with it.

Boston has dominated this series. Half of period 1, all of period 2, half of period 3, and 90% of ot in game 1. Game 2....the last 35 minutes plus ALL of ot.

Leddy....awful. Seeing him get walked by a 3rd line player by choosing to throw a half @ss attempt at a stick check is a joke. He's been brutal all playoffs. He and seabrook are neck and neck for the title.

Core.....a goal from sharp, and an assist from hossa. Are toews and Kane playing? Getting very tired of all the lap articles for toews as he hits at 1 goal tied with bollan and saad.

70% of game 2 winners win the cup. Boston has proven they can handle the hawks without their ideal matchups what happens in Boston? I sense at least 1 blowout.

So let the stalberg militia let loose. He can come down from a top mt hockey elite and bless all of us with his once in a lifetime skill set.
- SteveRain

Completely agree about the PP. Although I was already told this morning that the last 5 cup winners had a flatlined PP in the finals...so what...you've got enough top end talent out there to put the darn thing in the net. What's worse was the 5 on 3 Wednesday night where they didn't even get off a shot. Kompon is brutal. The Bs have already shown they will clutch grab their way to the Cup. And that's even easier when they know they can get away with it.

Any chance Barry Smith makes a cameo appearance on the ice tomorrow in Beantown? We can only hope.

The other thing I didn't care for was the disallowed goal - fine it doesn't count, but don't spend an hour figuring that out. It took away momentum from the Hawks and gave Boston a break there...for quite a while.

In game 3 or 4 the hawks will lose by at least 3. That blowout is coming. Question is can the hawks grind their way to a road win in the other game?

Doubtful. Not built to grind and the hawks pp won't make bruins pay when they take clutch/grab penalties.
- SteveRain

Not sure. I can actually see them winning either or both games. They will need to sack up at both ends of the ice. They did it Game 1 and at times last night.

I'm still pissed about last night, more so about the missed opportunity to leave town with a 2-0 lead. But just as I beat this drum last night, their indecisiveness in their own end cost them. I realize Boston's pressure had something to do with this. But once you hang on to the puck and aren't really skating with it, you've lost your opportunity for a break out.

It's like the line in Bull Durham...'Don't think...it can only hurt the ballclub.' I think this team plays it's best when it just plays/reacts. The production of Leddy and Oduya, specifically, drops off when they are forced to be more 'cerebral'

They stopped skating after the 1st period, as if the Bruins would be intimidated by putting up 19 shots on goal. I had seen this act before and knew if they didn't get 1-2 more quick goals, we would all be in for a rough night. Shame on me for falling for it again.

The Bruins have dictated the play for the majority of the first two games. I would bet the hawks have maybe played 3 good periods, out of 7. If that doesn't change, this will be Bruins in 6.

Completely agree about the PP. Although I was already told this morning that the last 5 cup winners had a flatlined PP in the finals...so what...you've got enough top end talent out there to put the darn thing in the net. What's worse was the 5 on 3 Wednesday night where they didn't even get off a shot. Kompon is brutal. The Bs have already shown they will clutch grab their way to the Cup. And that's even easier when they know they can get away with it.

Any chance Barry Smith makes a cameo appearance on the ice tomorrow in Beantown? We can only hope.

The other thing I didn't care for was the disallowed goal - fine it doesn't count, but don't spend an hour figuring that out. It took away momentum from the Hawks and gave Boston a break there...for quite a while.
- DK002

Not happening. You're stuck with Kompon, although I can see Scotty phoning in an approach, if he hasn't already.

The larger issue is the points. They don't have the right guys there. They don't have an option in front of the net really other than Shaw (at 5'10"). Stanley has not addressed either of these issues. All the scheming in the world does you no good if you don't have the right talent to execute it.

I'm still pissed about last night, more so about the missed opportunity to leave town with a 2-0 lead. But just as I beat this drum last night, their indecisiveness in their own end cost them. I realize Boston's pressure had something to do with this. But once you hang on to the puck and aren't really skating with it, you've lost your opportunity for a break out.

It's like the line in Bull Durham...'Don't think...it can only hurt the ballclub.' I think this team plays it's best when it just plays/reacts. The production of Leddy and Oduya, specifically, drops off when they are forced to be more 'cerebral'

They stopped skating after the 1st period, as if the Bruins would be intimidated by putting up 19 shots on goal. I had seen this act before and knew if they didn't get 1-2 more quick goals, we would all be in for a rough night. Shame on me for falling for it again.

The Bruins have dictated the play for the majority of the first two games. I would bet the hawks have maybe played 3 good periods, out of 7. If that doesn't change, this will be Bruins in 6.
- eburgio

if the Hawks lose 2 in Boston, Boston in 5 is more likely.

In game 3 or 4 the hawks will lose by at least 3. That blowout is coming. Question is can the hawks grind their way to a road win in the other game?

Doubtful. Not built to grind and the hawks pp won't make bruins pay when they take clutch/grab penalties.
- SteveRain

I agree about a blowout coming. But I disagree with taking clutch and grab penalties. They aren't even calling them on any of them. So they don't even have to deal with killing the penalties. The refs mostly are swallowing their whistle which always benefits a grinder vs. A speed and skill team

I think it's time to go back to the lines from the LA series. Bickell has been invisible. Kane's back to dangling through 3 defenders (maybe that'll never stop) and Bickell has looked lost.

Bicks - Toews - Kaner
Sharp - Handzus - Hossa
Saad - Bolland - Shaw
Stalberg - Kruger - Frolik

if the Hawks lose 2 in Boston, Boston in 5 is more likely.
- John Jaeckel

See, this is the roller coaster of sports that kills me. I have gone from feeling good about being up 1-0 after 3OT and potentially leaving town up 2-0, to...jeez, I sure do hope the Hawks can win one on the road.

They can't afford to F around anymore and react to Boston. They need to push the tempo and force the issue. But I just don't know they can. Very nervous about this.

I think it's time to go back to the lines from the LA series. Bickell has been invisible. Kane's back to dangling through 3 defenders (maybe that'll never stop) and Bickell has looked lost.

Bicks - Toews - Kaner
Sharp - Handzus - Hossa
Saad - Bolland - Shaw
Stalberg - Kruger - Frolik
- eburgio

This could happen. But to me, unless the Hawks really start standing up physically—including putting more hits on Boston and getting THEM thinking twice, it's just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

All the apologists who were on here after Game 1 chastising people for saying the Hawks weren't physical enough for the playoffs, where are they this morning? That bad dream came true last night.

I think it's time to go back to the lines from the LA series. Bickell has been invisible. Kane's back to dangling through 3 defenders (maybe that'll never stop) and Bickell has looked lost.

Bicks - Toews - Kaner
Sharp - Handzus - Hossa
Saad - Bolland - Shaw
Stalberg - Kruger - Frolik
- eburgio

You have my vote now we need Q's

This could happen. But to me, unless the Hawks really start standing up physically—including putting more hits on Boston and getting THEM thinking twice, it's just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

All the apologists who were on here after Game 1 chastising people for saying the Hawks weren't physical enough for the playoffs, where are they this morning? That bad dream came true last night.
- John Jaeckel

It's clear. They have been intimidated, as evidenced by the Hammer no look pass.

The 'good' news is that I feel Boston has controlled most of these games and hasn't pulled away. Are they just weathering the storm? Possibly. I think they know they can't skate with Chicago, so they are putting bodies on them. At the same time, Boston has pretty much had all the good looks on net save for the 1st period last night.

My line changes are more about getting Bickell going. I don't think that line change all of a sudden changes the complexity of the series, but he's a non factor right now and one of the biggest reasons the Hawks made it through the last two rounds. Need to get him going.

I agree about a blowout coming. But I disagree with taking clutch and grab penalties. They aren't even calling them on any of them. So they don't even have to deal with killing the penalties. The refs mostly are swallowing their whistle which always benefits a grinder vs. A speed and skill team
- tomcat24

Which again points to Hawks facing both the bruins and the zebras. LA va BOS I can understand swallowing the whistle, but allowing the Bruins to CHEAT in prder to prevent the Hawks from playing THEIR game, in other words, to adjust the rules to accomodate BOSTON'S playstyle, is unfair and BIASED.

It was funny listening to a certain sports radio station during the week, as to how fast they felt the Hawks would dispatch the Bruins based on game 1. They must have watched a different game, as the Hawks could easily be down 2-0. The Bruins pretty much controlled the game after the first period, and they looked like they were on the powerplay for most of the O.T. Should Chicago not win one of the next two, they're done. Same guys willing to go into the dirty areas, and the same guy not willing. Wonder if Stalberg gets released from the dog house.
- howiehandles

Agree totally. As for Stalberg............ Quenneville should have realized after a triple overtime game that fresh legs would be important. Coach Q is in serious jeopardy of really screwing this up big time !! HE is the head coach and makes the decisions on who plays and who sits. HE is the head coach that hired this Compon to run this powerplay. And HE is ultimately the decision maker on the match ups.
If HE costs us this Stanley Cup.......... HE will be the blame for being severely out coached by Clode !

See, this is the roller coaster of sports that kills me. I have gone from feeling good about being up 1-0 after 3OT and potentially leaving town up 2-0, to...jeez, I sure do hope the Hawks can win one on the road.

They can't afford to F around anymore and react to Boston. They need to push the tempo and force the issue. But I just don't know they can. Very nervous about this.
- eburgio

75.3% who win game 2 win the cup. It's such a huge game.

Sadly, I think the hawks are done. Cc is a due for a meltdown and Boston is toughest place to win since 2008/09 playoffs.

Hope im wrong but I see a team full of scared little boys getting intimidated by a team full of men.

Which again points to Hawks facing both the bruins and the zebras. LA va BOS I can understand swallowing the whistle, but allowing the Bruins to CHEAT in prder to prevent the Hawks from playing THEIR game, in other words, to adjust the rules to accomodate BOSTON'S playstyle, is unfair and BIASED.
- Q...argh

The Hawks are getting away with stuff, too.

Hockey's a contact sport. Hawks need to get the memo. Boston is not taking their foot off the gas. If the Hawks can only play a cute, finesse kind of game, they don't deserve to win in the playoffs. Period.