I would like to see Stalberg in the lineup. No he isn't the end all be all. But if he makes that turnover Bollig did... He would be sent to permanent purgatory. And if he was such a liability... Why was he in he lineup all year?

Also time to re ignite once again Kane and Toews. Q does so much that makes me wonder. Including defusing a dominant Kane and Toews line late in the LA series.
- ilinkhawk

Absolutely

And exactly what Doug MAcLean on Sports Net has been saying all along
If it ain't broke why fix it!

Al, with all due respect to you and the other informed posters, how can you possibly know that he makes no difference? Fresh legs and some spark would have been an advantage vs a tired team. I am really shocked by many smart peoples flippant view that a roster spot in the finals is not a big deal.

Moreover, and this is actually to my point, why have we made adjustments first to our opponent.? I know I beat the horse on this, but it is baffling to me how you mess with a winning line up to try to match up to the other team, when maybe you should get behind your guys, your style of play and all the momentum you have built over a season being who you are and let Bos worry about all the matchup headaches?

Then adjust.
- TrueGrit

In my opinion he makes no difference.

In Game 1 the best players for the Hawks were the bottom six forwards.

In Game 2 after the opening 20 mins they got completely outplayed by a wide margin

Don't see what difference Stalberg would have made and certainly no difference on the PP because he wouldn't have been on the ice.

Stalberg is not a difference maker that is going to turn a downhill 40 minute effort around against this level of competition.

Other more obvious reasons are there for this defeat.

Incredible start, no finish as the Blackhawks drop Game 2 in OT - My Fox Chicago- FOX 32 News http://bit.ly/11IESN5

No one reacted TG, Q proactively changed his tactics based on the opposition. This tactic is tried and true and practised by all successful teams.
- paulr

He proactively made changes because he knew what they had been successful with all season and in prior series, which by the way worked, could not work now, without 1 minute of evidence.

BTW, show me what adjustments Boston made? Q goes line juggler in advance of game one in anticipation of Boston doing this or that with d pairs and lines. Bos laughs and just plays their line up. Comedy. Funny how Krejci and Bergeron are not crying in the media about all the tough ice and matchups. This is so overblown and over coached, and like in the first game, led to 2 too many men penalties. Look for some qoutes and evidence of Kings matchup strategy last year.

At some point you understand who you are and you get behind that idea and roll with it. Would take Sutter all day over Q.

In my opinion he makes no difference.

In Game 1 the best players for the Hawks were the bottom six forwards.

In Game 2 after the opening 20 mins they got completely outplayed by a wide margin

Don't see what difference Stalberg would have made and certainly no difference on the PP because he wouldn't have been on the ice.

Stalberg is not a difference maker that is going to turn a downhill 40 minute effort around against this level of competition.

Other more obvious reasons are there for this defeat.

Incredible start, no finish as the Blackhawks drop Game 2 in OT - My Fox Chicago- FOX 32 News http://bit.ly/11IESN5
- Al

Fair enough, I agree with you on other reasons, regarding the other, I will respectfully disagree.

In my opinion he makes no difference.

In Game 1 the best players for the Hawks were the bottom six forwards.

In Game 2 after the opening 20 mins they got completely outplayed by a wide margin

Don't see what difference Stalberg would have made and certainly no difference on the PP because he wouldn't have been on the ice.

Stalberg is not a difference maker that is going to turn a downhill 40 minute effort around against this level of competition.

Other more obvious reasons are there for this defeat.

Incredible start, no finish as the Blackhawks drop Game 2 in OT - My Fox Chicago- FOX 32 News http://bit.ly/11IESN5
- Al

Respectfully disagree

Any small difference is huge when two teams are this evenly matched and since both games have been long OT battles
Fresh legs and any jump we can find in game 3 is worth consideration

Coaches have to make sure to put players - including superstars and $6MM men - in the right position to succeed - is Q doing that with the core?

As far as Q staying out of the way: as we keep saying, regular season is different - you don't play the same very good team - certainly a team as god as you are - 4-7 straight games. By game two/three/four, each team knows the other in and out, strengths and weaknesses. Now it's up to the coaches to figure out the right adjustments - and the players to execute.
- StLBravesFan

Exactly, which is my point, that is you roll out what you know has been succesful and proven and go off that. You play to your teams strengths.

Regarding Toews and others, are our world class players so fragile, they can only score on 4th line opponents? I get what you are saying to a point, but do you think Julien is sitting and running Krejci and others off the ice in fear of mr Selke?

Bickell is not on the Power Play because it's the old man Wirtz theory of attempting to under value him come contract time. "You didn't produce in the Finals so here's a mil a year for the next 4 years " . There is absolutely NO reason why Bickell is not on the first PP unit to station himself in front of the net where he's had considerable success so far this playoff season. IMO..... they do not want the media circus all over again when they don't sign ANOTHER big man in front of the net...... a la Dustin Byfuglien. And don't tell me that our big 4 forwards have to do a better job of net presence !! They don't have the size or strength to do it. In the playoffs.......... that should now be Bickell's job !!
- Hawkytalk

So they are going hurt their chances to win the Cup this year by leaving a guy off the power play that may help.

Everything after the 1st period tells me Boston had a much better chance of winning the game...2 goal lead or not. The Hawks have had more than their share of breaks.

Incredible start, no finish as the Blackhawks drop Game 2 in OT - My Fox Chicago- FOX 32 News http://bit.ly/11IESN5
- Al

That is true. Hawks definitely quit playing their game after the 1st and boston kicked it up a notch. But even though there was a lot of time left, being down 1 is a lot different than being down 2. But Hawks only have themselves to blame by bad 2nd and 3rd

Respectfully disagree

Any small difference is huge when two teams are this evenly matched and since both games have been long OT battles
Fresh legs and any jump we can find in game 3 is worth consideration
- PEIHawkFan

When was the last time Stalberg made a difference in a playoff game??

This isn't like the difference between a John Scott and Stalberg....

And it's freak'n Viktor Stalberg who in the most important year in his playing career would have had maybe a 40 point season, on the best team in the NHL, if the schedule was complete. ...And has never shown the overall game to be a 4th line player.

I can think of many reasons to criticize Q....The PP, splitting up Kane/Toews etc but not about benching Stalberg. If Stalberg played the first game maybe he doesn't have the impact Bollig's 10 hits had??

It's about time people realize that when the Hawks lose it is about more than one failed clearing attempt, or one soft goal etc.

Blame Q. for not being able to reignite the entire lineup after the first period and letting the Bruins turn a miserable start around but not about benching Stalberg.

As far as Game 3 changes....I'd say there is less than a 25% chance Stalberg plays judging from Q's comments.

...And if the Hawks win Game 3 there is probably greater than a 75% chance Stalberg has already played his final game aof the season.

Inredible start, no finish as the Blackhawks drop Game 2 in OT - My Fox Chicago- FOX 32 News http://bit.ly/11IESN5

What we have are two of the best teams in the league going at it. Games are won and lost. The Hawks will bounce back. Game 3 will have a much better effort just like the last two series. Good god we came back down 3-1 to the Wings and then took out the Kings in 5. I do take issue with this game being thrown at the feet of CC. When you go to sleep and get hammered in the 2nd and 3rd bad things happen. CC has been a rock and is my MVP pick if we win. He has been f'n lights out. My question is wtf is up with 19 & 88. Outside of Kane's trick against the Kings he has done zilch. 19 had a great regular season, but has not done much in the playoffs. Scoring is one thing, but he is getting his ass kicked at the dot. 19 has the effort, but he needs to score, PERIOD!! The best over all forward has been Sharp. What is still lacking is that big forward who will consistently hammer the D and create space. Bickell can do it, just not consistently. 19 and 88 are targeted and taken off their game too easily. Maybe Q out thought himself (again) by f'n with the lines. Cant wait to see what he cooks up for game 3.

Another day and another mile added to the legend of Vic Stalberg. LMMFAO.

When was the last time Stalberg made a difference in a playoff game??

This isn't like the difference between a John Scott and Stalberg....

And it's freak'n Viktor Stalberg who in the most important year in his playing career would have had maybe a 40 point season, on the best team in the NHL, if the schedule was complete. ...And has never shown the overall game to be a 4th line player.

I can think of many reasons to criticize Q....The PP, splitting up Kane/Toews etc but not about benching Stalberg. If Stalberg played the first game maybe he doesn't have the impact Bollig's 10 hits had??

It's about time people realize that when the Hawks lose it is about more than one failed clearing attempt, or one soft goal etc.

Blame Q. for not being able to reignite the entire lineup after the first period and letting the Bruins turn a miserable start around but not about benching Stalberg.

As far as Game 3 changes....I'd say there is less than a 25% chance Stalberg plays judging from Q's comments.

...And if the Hawks win Game 3 there is probably greater than a 75% chance Stalberg has already played his final game aof the season.

Inredible start, no finish as the Blackhawks drop Game 2 in OT - My Fox Chicago- FOX 32 News http://bit.ly/11IESN5
- Al

He made a difference vs the Wild. Not in a top 6 all star way. But his speed does cause problems. Bollig doesn't set up Bickells game winner in OT against the Wild. He can make plays and create problems. He also isn't the only one who makes turnovers. He does seem to be the only one not allowed to make mistakes. He makes us a better team IMO.

Is he difference between winning and losing? Maybe. Maybe not. That isn't the point. You should always field the team that gives you the best chance to win. Who knows what will happen. Where I agree with you is Q doesn't use Stalberg when he is in he lineup. That doesn't make it right though.

In the end. This is another player who Q wrongly phucks with IMO. Some guys on this team make costly turnovers or dumb decisions and are back on the ice for the puck drop after the goal. I have no problem with that as long as it is consistent.

Fans are funny. They nit pick at superfluous areas that really mean very little. Bollig v Stalberg. Ho hum...

No lets spend all day discussing marginal role players. ... Forget the REAL reason the Hawks lost...that their entire defensive unit (save Rosival) was turned into creampuffs by a fast and relentless Boston fore check and Brent Seabrook was the absolute worst player on the ice by far.

The sad thing is the Hawks weakness, which they magically have been hiding, may have become exposed again. We talk about grit and toughness...last night the BOTTOM LINE reason this team lost was because the other team was tougher. That's it in a nutshell and freaking Victor Stalberg would have made no difference and the bruins wouldn't have cared one iota about him.

Al, with all due respect to you and the other informed posters, how can you possibly know that he makes no difference? Fresh legs and some spark would have been an advantage vs a tired team. I am really shocked by many smart peoples flippant view that a roster spot in the finals is not a big deal.

Moreover, and this is actually to my point, why have we made adjustments first to our opponent.? I know I beat the horse on this, but it is baffling to me how you mess with a winning line up to try to match up to the other team, when maybe you should get behind your guys, your style of play and all the momentum you have built over a season being who you are and let Bos worry about all the matchup headaches?

Then adjust.
- TrueGrit

And how can you possibly know he does make a difference?

Let's use a bit of logic here, shall we? To all those who keep complaining that the Hawks aren't getting physical, and that they are built to a regular season speed and skill model while Boston is built on a grinding and bruising playoff model:

Might I ask, if that is the case (and I'm not denying it), then why in the HELL would you expect the Hawks to try and play THAT game and beat a team that is actually BUILT for it??? It won't happen. Maybe 2 games in 10. Not 4 out of 7! They need to play THEIR game to the best of their ability and attempt to beat Boston THAT way. That's like asking Steven Hawking to subdue a grizzly bear by wrestling him, instead of using his brain to set a trap for him. Common sense goes a long way.
- Q...argh

You are right. The Hawks absolutely shouldn't try to beat the Bruins at their own game. The Hawks need to play with skill and execute on the PP and PK. That's the only way to beat the Bruins in the finals when the refs lose their whistles and minds.

The Canucks PP died on them in the finals and that's one Huge reason why they lost - another being AV's failure to use his goalies correctly (ie: not pulling Luongo in game 3 after 2 bad goals). If Hawks execute on the PP then Bruins can't do all the cheap shot dirty bullpoop that they normally do all game long. All that dirty cheap shot play adds up to injuries and wears a skill team down until they aren't able to play at anything approaching their skill level (which again is what happened to Vancouver).

If Hawks coaches and players are smart they will watch the Finals from 2011 and learn what a skill team faces and for the sake of all that is holy, pull your goaltender if the B's score 2 bad goals.

And how can you possibly know he does make a difference?
- paulr

He doesn't know. It's called blind faith. Folks focused on Bollig can't admit our team got worked...can't admit that 'stars' have been useless or worse (Seabrook). They REALLY believe Chicago is superior to Boston, just as big and tough and the ONLY reason the Hawks are not running away with this thing is because Brandon Bollig played 8 minutes of hockey last night (if that). They are living in a bubble of delusion that blinds them from the real reality that COULD be creeping in...as this series goes longer Boston will bring even more tenacity and toughness. It's NOT gonna get any easier and putting the wide skating, fly by, hands of stone Stalberg out there won't make Boston blink for a moment.

The PROBLEM with the Hawks is they got NINE shots on goal in 50 minutes of hockey. That isn't Brandon Bollig, that's a team getting pounded in all facets of the game by a superior (at least on that night) opponent.

He made a difference vs the Wild. Not in a top 6 all star way. But his speed does cause problems. Bollig doesn't set up Bickells game winner in OT against the Wild. He can make plays and create problems. He also isn't the only one who makes turnovers. He does seem to be the only one not allowed to make mistakes. He makes us a better team IMO.

Is he difference between winning and losing? Maybe. Maybe not. That isn't the point. You should always field the team that gives you the best chance to win. Who knows what will happen. Where I agree with you is Q doesn't use Stalberg when he is in he lineup. That doesn't make it right though.

In the end. This is another player who Q wrongly phucks with IMO. Some guys on this team make costly turnovers or dumb decisions and are back on the ice for the puck drop after the goal. I have no problem with that as long as it is consistent.
- ilinkhawk

Not going to defend Q. and Stalberg has the abilty to do more than Bollig....But does he play as well on the 4th line as Bollig did in Game 1....Most likely not.

The stop and start efforts that have happened in every series need to stop or the results will be bad Stalberg or not and opportunity for a Cup will be blown.

Inredible start, no finish as the Blackhawks drop Game 2 in OT - My Fox Chicago- FOX 32 News http://bit.ly/11IESN5

Fans are funny. They nit pick at superfluous areas that really mean very little. Bollig v Stalberg. Ho hum...

No lets spend all day discussing marginal role players. ... Forget the REAL reason the Hawks lost...that their entire defensive unit (save Rosival) was turned into creampuffs by a fast and relentless Boston fore check and Brent Seabrook was the absolute worst player on the ice by far.

The sad thing is the Hawks weakness, which they magically have been hiding, may have become exposed again. We talk about grit and toughness...last night the BOTTOM LINE reason this team lost was because the other team was tougher. That's it in a nutshell and freaking Victor Stalberg would have made no difference and the bruins wouldn't have cared one iota about him.
- kwolf68

And still the Hawks lost by one goal. If they wet themselves in Boston, this team will have to look at themselves in the mirror.

Though with the talk of Stablberg v Bollig why not throw Carbomb into the mix?

My goodness. Some of you guys are the most wishy-washy, weak willed sports fans I have ever seen. We lose one game, and the you are packing it in and calling it a season? Where is your constitution? Where are your guts?

If you thought this was going to be easy, you were setting yourself up for disappointment.

Now put your shirt back on and get ready for some more hockey.
- Fat_Tony_Amonte

I for one recall that the Hawks have always been a great road team.So the series is tied up at one to one,no big surprise.Alot of people on here like to talk about what a long series this will be and yet are shocked when we actually lose a game.

As bad as the D was last night, lack of forward support and trying the stretch passes get them nailed repeatedly. Stretch passes, like the deep ball in football, can't be nearly every play without consequences (more pressure and a pounding). Using it much of the night played into the Bruins plan, despite a few Hawk chances.

Hawks had to fix that buffoonery vs Detroit and seem to need to relearn the same lesson. They need short, quick passes to break out--and the forwards have to be on board. That would have been a nice, simple in-game adjustment...and perhaps a few 'counter hits'.

Bollig is useful in this series if he has the kind of effort/game as Gm 1. Last night he brought nothing, but wasn't alone.

You are right. The Hawks absolutely shouldn't try to beat the Bruins at their own game. The Hawks need to play with skill and execute on the PP and PK. That's the only way to beat the Bruins in the finals when the refs lose their whistles and minds.

The Canucks PP died on them in the finals and that's one Huge reason why they lost - another being AV's failure to use his goalies correctly (ie: not pulling Luongo in game 3 after 2 bad goals). If Hawks execute on the PP then Bruins can't do all the cheap shot dirty bullpoop that they normally do all game long. All that dirty cheap shot play adds up to injuries and wears a skill team down until they aren't able to play at anything approaching their skill level (which again is what happened to Vancouver).

If Hawks coaches and players are smart they will watch the Finals from 2011 and learn what a skill team faces and for the sake of all that is holy, pull your goaltender if the B's score 2 bad goals.
- kaptaan

The PP play matters most when a team gets outplayed 5 on 5. For the Hawks to win they have to control the play when at even strength otherwise don't expect the PP to bail them out at this point.

The Bruins are the only team in the NHL with a PK as good as the Hawks.


Inredible start, no finish as the Blackhawks drop Game 2 in OT - My Fox Chicago- FOX 32 News http://bit.ly/11IESN5

When was the last time Stalberg made a difference in a playoff game??

This isn't like the difference between a John Scott and Stalberg....

And it's freak'n Viktor Stalberg who in the most important year in his playing career would have had maybe a 40 point season, on the best team in the NHL, if the schedule was complete. ...And has never shown the overall game to be a 4th line player.

I can think of many reasons to criticize Q....The PP, splitting up Kane/Toews etc but not about benching Stalberg. If Stalberg played the first game maybe he doesn't have the impact Bollig's 10 hits had??

It's about time people realize that when the Hawks lose it is about more than one failed clearing attempt, or one soft goal etc.

Blame Q. for not being able to reignite the entire lineup after the first period and letting the Bruins turn a miserable start around but not about benching Stalberg.

As far as Game 3 changes....I'd say there is less than a 25% chance Stalberg plays judging from Q's comments.

...And if the Hawks win Game 3 there is probably greater than a 75% chance Stalberg has already played his final game aof the season.

Inredible start, no finish as the Blackhawks drop Game 2 in OT - My Fox Chicago- FOX 32 News http://bit.ly/11IESN5
- Al

You make too much sense al.

Nobody in recent memory has gotten more love for doing absolutely nothing then stalberg.

Lets all repeat....he has ZERO career playoff goals. Was a ghost against Phoenix last year. And what has he done this playoff? Took a crazy carom off the glass against minny and set up bickell.

And still the Hawks lost by one goal. If they wet themselves in Boston, this team will have to look at themselves in the mirror.

Though with the talk of Stablberg v Bollig why not throw Carbomb into the mix?
- faustus1500

Yes, 1 goal loss...5 goal loss, doesn't matter.

Carcillo I think they are worried will take too many dumb penalties. Don't know...he is a better skater than Bollig and hits just as much. But it's a good question to pose.

You make too much sense al.

Nobody in recent memory has gotten more love for doing absolutely nothing then stalberg.

Lets all repeat....he has ZERO career playoff goals. Was a ghost against Phoenix last year. And what has he done this playoff? Took a crazy carom off the glass against minny and set up bickell.
- SteveRain

so are u are a stalberg not lover.. he needs to be in the lineup. bollig now you love, no his run is done.

As bad as the D was last night, lack of forward support and trying the stretch passes get them nailed repeatedly. Stretch passes, like the deep ball in football, can't be nearly every play without consequences (more pressure and a pounding). Using it much of the night played into the Bruins plan, despite a few Hawk chances.

Hawks had to fix that buffoonery vs Detroit and seem to need to relearn the same lesson. They need short, quick passes to break out--and the forwards have to be on board. That would have been a nice, simple in-game adjustment...and perhaps a few 'counter hits'.
- grinder10

The Hawks were trying the short quick passes and succeeded early, but Boston had 2 men in on the forecheck and 1 man covering the middle...at that point it becomes chip it out unless you can skate it...Once Boston got their legs going the Hawks could barely get the puck out of their own zone. It was about as dominating an effort as the Hawks have had laid against them this year.

NINE SHOTS in 50 minutes of hockey with THIS talent? A lot of that starts in the Hawks own zone, I thought the Hawks defensive core played some of the most pathetic hockey I've seen from a Hawks team in years. It was brutal.