If the Hawks can win in Boston...I don't think they can.

But will be thrilled to be proven wrong.
- ArlingtonRob

I guess you didn't think they could win in LA either?

So if he we have no edges anywhere as you say... How do we win??
- ilinkhawk

I see no edge for Chicago and Boston's only edge is "physicality" and I am not sure how sustainable that is depending on how the Hawks respond.

Basically...series is a coin flip...The winner will execute better, make fewer bonehead plays, get lucky, etc...I see no surefire way either team has the 'magic potion' to beat the other guy, unless Boston playing hard on the forecheck is that answer.

So just saying "If Chicago skates we win" isn't going to cut it. This series should go seven...and I think we could see 4 or even 5 games go to overtime. It's got that kind of feel, as long as the Clown Shoes play by Seabs/Leddy/Hammer from game 2 vanishes.

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

Simple, in playoffs record with 25 11 W 4L
W/O 2 w and 2l

Regular season, check the standings.

That's the hunch it makes a difference.

There is not enough to go on to suggest that he may give your team the best chance to win, I know.

He proactively made changes because history and experience told him that a pure speed, skill game has not, does not and will never beat a mix of skill and grit. Show me one, just one team, that won the Cupwith a team that has no physical defencemen and one somewhat physical forward and one pint sized very physical forward. You can't do it becuase it has never been done.

Maybe the Hawks can find a way to win it all but if they don't start hitting the Bruins it will be over very quickly.
- paulr

While you study your history books, I will just go on the ACTUAL results of this team here and now. Hope this does not ruin your fathers day, but the Hawks will not be able to trade for Lucic or Ott before Monday. So guess what, we will have to play with the guys we have.


Like prior series with Detroit, if we do not start outscoring the Bruins, we will likely lose.

I see no edge for Chicago and Boston's only edge is "physicality" and I am not sure how sustainable that is depending on how the Hawks respond.

Basically...series is a coin flip...The winner will execute better, make fewer bonehead plays, get lucky, etc...I see no surefire way either team has the 'magic potion' to beat the other guy, unless Boston playing hard on the forecheck is that answer.

So just saying "If Chicago skates we win" isn't going to cut it. This series should go seven...and I think we could see 4 or even 5 games go to overtime. It's got that kind of feel, as long as the Clown Shoes play by Seabs/Leddy/Hammer from game 2 vanishes.
- kwolf68

I think we have more ways to beat Boston offensively. We have more weapons. I think Boston creates most of their opportunity forechecking and hoping for turnovers. We have more guys who can create offense. Have they showed yet? No. But I still think roster top to bottom this is where our edge is. And I do think you saw a glimpse of it in the first period.

FACT: The Hawks won game one when they were hitting.
FACT: Chicago lost game two when they tried to play a finesse hit free game.
- paulr

Fact, Hawks 11 - 4 with Stalberg in playoffs....2 and 2 with him out. But I know it is the games we outhit the Bruins that matter most.

BTW 36 - 7 -5 with Stalberg in line up during regular season.

Chicago stopped skating in second period. And...news flash...got nothing from Toews again.

Series 1 to 1 at this point.

I think we have more ways to beat Boston offensively. We have more weapons. I think Boston creates most of their opportunity forechecking. We have more guys who can create offense. Have they showed yet? No. But I still think roster top to bottom this is where our edge is. And I do think you saw a glimpse of it in the first period.
- ilinkhawk

I think the only area where the Hawks are better talent wise to Boston is along the wings. I'd take Boston's centers over ours and the Defensive core while very different is a wash I think. Because Boston is so strong at center, that actually eliminates any gap in skill. I don't see how our team is more talented than them (save the wings as I said...our wings are dynamite).

Their third line scored both their goals last night.

Our team is more capable of making the amazing plays, both from our blueline and from the forwards, but those plays don't win championships. It's doing the little things, winning important faceoffs, grinding down low on the forecheck, getting to the dirty areas, not melting down in your own zone that win games.

Why not ? Stalberg's been fairly invisible when he's been in...otherwise...he'd still be in.
- philco28

If being invisible for a game or two is a measuring stick, then we would and every team would rotate 5 guys in and out every game.

By all means, everyone ignore that pesky stat of wins and losses with 25 in line up.

If Stalberg is an offensive threat point to his point toals. Fact is Stalberg was a warm body taking up a roster spot and nothing else.
- paulr

Conversely, show me the reels of film we have on 25 just poopting the bed. 25 still has more points per minute played then 19.

I know that is different....

Fact, Hawks 11 - 4 with Stalberg in playoffs....2 and 2 with him out. But I know it is the games we outhit the Bruins that matter most.

BTW 36 - 7 -5 with Stalberg in line up during regular season.

Chicago stopped skating in second period. And...news flash...got nothing from Toews again.

Series 1 to 1 at this point.
- TrueGrit

Q won't do this... But to me this gives Boston the most problems...
29-19-88
81-26-10
67-36-65
20-16-25
Roll em..

Honest Question

Would the almighty Mike Babcock sit Gustav Nyquist for the final and play Jordan Tootoo? Or would he likely dance with who got him to the dance?

Q won't do this... But to me this gives Boston the most problems...
29-19-88
81-26-10
67-36-65
20-16-25
Roll em..
- ilinkhawk

Actually, you can just insert Stalberg on 4th line. Leave Saad where he is, messing with chemistry at this point is counterproductive.

Q won't do this... But to me this gives Boston the most problems...
29-19-88
81-26-10
67-36-65
20-16-25
Roll em..
- ilinkhawk

I actually don't hate this. I have been very impressed with how Frolik has played and a bump up to third line wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. A line of Bolly/Shaw/Frolik ... while not a huge third line, is damn pesky.

I don't really like the fourth line much..it's OK I guess (Saad in a checking role?), but the top 3 lines are pretty good.

Honest Question

Would the almighty Mike Babcock sit Gustav Nyquist for the final and play Jordan Tootoo? Or would he likely dance with who got him to the dance?
- TrueGrit

Tootoo would sit.

If being invisible for a game or two is a measuring stick, then we would and every team would rotate 5 guys in and out every game.

By all means, everyone ignore that pesky stat of wins and losses with 25 in line up.
- TrueGrit

No question the team's record with Vik is excellent. Problem is, how much of that lofty record is due to Vik ? Do tell TG.

I think the only area where the Hawks are better talent wise to Boston is along the wings. I'd take Boston's centers over ours and the Defensive core while very different is a wash I think. Because Boston is so strong at center, that actually eliminates any gap in skill. I don't see how our team is more talented than them (save the wings as I said...our wings are dynamite).

Their third line scored both their goals last night.

Our team is more capable of making the amazing plays, both from our blueline and from the forwards, but those plays don't win championships. It's doing the little things, winning important faceoffs, grinding down low on the forecheck, getting to the dirty areas, not melting down in your own zone that win games.
- kwolf68

We will just disagree and are what happens. I think our team is better at creating legit scoring chances accross the board fancy or not. More weapons.. My take.

Your information is totally inaccurate
- Maggie

From your bolds and "totally inaccurate" I thought you may have attended every practice.

http://espn.go.com/blog/c...-practice-due-to-sickness

Carcillo misses practice due to sickness.

From ESPN no less.

I'm not anti-Carcillo. Just believe it would be a reach. It may happen, particularly if the Hawks get blown up physically in game 3. I would take anyone going to the front of the net or creating space for Toews at this point.

I actually don't hate this. I have been very impressed with how Frolik has played and a bump up to third line wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. A line of Bolly/Shaw/Frolik ... while not a huge third line, is damn pesky.

I don't really like the fourth line much..it's OK I guess (Saad in a checking role?), but the top 3 lines are pretty good.
- kwolf68

Swap Saad and Frolik then. I think Frolik has been one of our best players these entire playoffs. This is why if Kane and Toews get going... We are near impossible to beat. We have so many other ways to get it done. Why my. First priority is making sure 19 and 88 are put in the best possible position to succeed. This to me is obviously playing with each other and Bickell.. Who btw could use these line mates.

Hawks have lost home ice and retain a -115 betting favorite to win this series...

No question the team's record with Vik is excellent. Problem is, how much of that lofty record is due to Vik ? Do tell TG.
- philco28

How much is attributable to any one player? That is the point. This is hockey, it is more dynamic then simple stats of goals and assists.

Why play him or half the guys then?

This exercise in logic is supposed to lead one to the conclusion of ...."hey, things were working fine, why did we eff with it all?"


With Chicago fans, when most invest in some narrative, logic fails to register.

All I have asked is, can we give the line up that succeeded all year 1 chance to play in the finals? Answer is NO, because we know it can't work, even though it has worked every where else it has been tried. Why people fight this is amusing to me.

Swap Saad and Frolik then. I think Frolik has been one of our best players these entire playoffs. This is why if Kane and Toews get going... We are near impossible to beat. We have so many other ways to get it done. Why my. First priority is making sure 19 and 88 are put in the best possible position to succeed. This to me is obviously playing with each other and Bickell.. Who btw could use these line mates.
- ilinkhawk

Switch Saad and Frolik and that looks great. That 29-19-88 combination I miss.

Wish Handzus could be given more spot duty - take a draw and get off or simply give Bolland or Shaw an extra shift for him occasionally. He really looks completely outclassed too often this series.

How much is attributable to any one player? That is the point. This is hockey, it is more dynamic then simple stats of goals and assists.

Why play him or half the guys then?

This exercise in logic is supposed to lead one to the conclusion of ...."hey, things were working fine, why did we eff with it all?"


With Chicago fans, when most invest in some narrative, logic fails to register.

All I have asked is, can we give the line up that succeeded all year 1 chance to play in the finals? Answer is NO, because we know it can't work, even though it has worked every where else it has been tried. Why people fight this is amusing to me.
- TrueGrit

I think the 25 benching has less to do with matchup and more to do with something else. He benched him in the wing series and they aren't that physical. Didn't bench him all year. Nor did he bench him last year against Phoenix.

Geezus Peace...i completely forgot about CAR BOMB. Love to see him get a shot at some point.
- philco28

I would not even consider DC because, while he certainly wouldn't do anything worse than Marchand or Sasquatch infraction wise, the swallow the whistle in the POs philosophy doesn't apply to him. If he so much as looked sideways at a Bruin, he'd draw a whistle. They're not leaving the Hawks with many options. Put Kane and Toews back together with Bicks, the Slovaks with Sharp, scratch Bollig for either Stalberg or Smith and put that guy on the 3rd or 4th line and play the HAWKS' (not Boston's) game.

How much is attributable to any one player? That is the point. This is hockey, it is more dynamic then simple stats of goals and assists.

Why play him or half the guys then?

This exercise in logic is supposed to lead one to the conclusion of ...."hey, things were working fine, why did we eff with it all?"


With Chicago fans, when most invest in some narrative, logic fails to register.

All I have asked is, can we give the line up that succeeded all year 1 chance to play in the finals? Answer is NO, because we know it can't work, even though it has worked every where else it has been tried. Why people fight this is amusing to me.
- TrueGrit

Your overall point is well taken. Vik played 47 of 48 games in the regular season and 15 of the 19 in the playoffs where we went 11-4. Only Q really knows why the change was made, but to me...Vik's contribution in the playoffs has been very hard to discern no matter how good the record is...but again....like you say...why was it phucked with ?

We will just disagree and are what happens. I think our team is better at creating legit scoring chances accross the board fancy or not. More weapons.. My take.
- ilinkhawk

If this game was played on paper I'd agree. As far as legit scoring chances, I wager Boston has had most of those.