Eklund saying the Hawks kicking tires on Steve Ott

That should make some people on here happy to be hearing that
- FourFeathers773

No chance.

How bout somebody give me a batting average of the rumors? 5%

Eklund saying the Hawks kicking tires on Steve Ott

That should make some people on here happy to be hearing that
- FourFeathers773

There is a better chance of True Grit taking down his Victor Stalberg poster, then Eklund breaking a Hawks trade.......

No chance.

How bout somebody give me a batting average of the rumors? 5%
- TrueGrit

0.0%

There is a better chance of True Grit taking down his Victor Stalberg poster, then Eklund breaking a Hawks trade.......
- SteveRain

TRUE TRUE!

There is a better chance of True Grit taking down his Victor Stalberg poster, then Eklund breaking a Hawks trade.......
- SteveRain

Nice haha

Good Stuff....
- TrueGrit

No doubt.

Sorry guys, this one's on Q.

I'm going to point to the most critical part of the game -- 3rd period when the Hawks were on the PP and then the 2nd Calgary penalty was called.

Does anyone remember that sequence? I do.

At the time of the 1st PP, you had the 2nd unit out there with Leddy and Seabrook on the points. As soon as the 2nd penalty was called, it seemed like forever before the faceoff. And lo and behold, who should magically appear on the ice but the beloved 1st unit PP with none other than #2 at the point.

I watched in horror and wanted to put my foot through the set -- watching Keith stand literally motionless passing the puck laterally back and forth to/from Hossa. I could not believe my eyes.

That sonofab i t c h stood almost motionless passing the puck back and forth wasting precious seconds while on the 2 man advantage. Yes, Hossa finally did score, but that was only after over a minute being wasted with this nonsense. And the G came after the 1st penalty had expired.

If Keith had any brains and any ability to be a true PP QB, he would have been moving, going to an open area and rotating with the other 4 Hawks out there to create a true goal-scoring opportunity while on the 2 man advantage. Instead, all of that time was literally wasted.

And instead of the Hawks having a chance to get 2 PP goals, one while up 2 men and while while up 1 man, the time was wasted.

That, to me, is solely on Q for his belief that Duncan Keith in any way, shape or form belongs as the primary go-to QB for the PP.

Absolute idiocy. Someone described Keith earlier in this thread or the previous perfectly -- like a rat on crack.
- savvyone-1

They all were motionless. And #2 was the one who finally moved to open up the ice for Kane to come out high. Now, if you want to complain about his passes to Hossa being off the mark a bit, I agree with you.

So watching CC this year, it seems that the word it out to shoot at his glove side. It looks like almost all of the goals agianst this year have been glove side high, and teams keep ripping them that direction.
- Fooseshark

That is the weakness for all butterfly goalies.

It doesn't take much to throw off the balance....Morin was benched after the Glencross goal...He played only 7 mins.

The 3rd and 4th lines played a lot in Winnipeg so he went with the top two lines late.

They just didn't play with conviction throughout and if you discount the shot total and look at scoring chances especially 2nd chances there was not enough.

As Q. said his team was okay....Not as good as previous games.

They took the Flames lightly and they got two breaks on deflections and their goalie was good...

Calgary surprises Hawks 3-2. Goalie Reto Berra was vg but Flames caught the Hawks at the right time. My Fox Chicago:http://bit.ly/Hwurcf
- Al

Funny thing about that Al. If I am not mistaken, I believe Toews, Hossa and Sharp were on the ice when Calgary broke out with puck on Glencross' goal. All of them were below the dots. Not to mention Brookbank giving Glencross way too much space.

Eklund saying the Hawks kicking tires on Steve Ott

That should make some people on here happy to be hearing that
- FourFeathers773

That is good news. He is never right.

Except for Fivenese (or whatever his name is), I don't see much Crawford bashing here.

Most of us say:

(1) He is a very good goalie
(2) They won one Cup with him, can certainly win some more
(3) He's played very well this year
(4) But: he has weaknesses

We certainly should be allowed to comment on his weaknesses, especially since (apparently) the league is aware of them, and (apparently) they will exploit them when possible.

Please try to read the posts instead of sarcastically putting down those of us who comment on Crawford's weaknesses (aimed at TG more than you).

EDIT to add: If it's ok to criticize Q for perceived weaknesses - a coach who led the team to 2 Cups - it is certainly ok to criticize Crawford for perceived weaknesses.
- StLBravesFan

I'm glad someone figured it out. I was just making an observation which seems to be more and more apparent during games. May Saad be with you.

Sorry guys, this one's on Q.

I'm going to point to the most critical part of the game -- 3rd period when the Hawks were on the PP and then the 2nd Calgary penalty was called.

Does anyone remember that sequence? I do.

At the time of the 1st PP, you had the 2nd unit out there with Leddy and Seabrook on the points. As soon as the 2nd penalty was called, it seemed like forever before the faceoff. And lo and behold, who should magically appear on the ice but the beloved 1st unit PP with none other than #2 at the point.

I watched in horror and wanted to put my foot through the set -- watching Keith stand literally motionless passing the puck laterally back and forth to/from Hossa. I could not believe my eyes.

That sonofab i t c h stood almost motionless passing the puck back and forth wasting precious seconds while on the 2 man advantage. Yes, Hossa finally did score, but that was only after over a minute being wasted with this nonsense. And the G came after the 1st penalty had expired.

If Keith had any brains and any ability to be a true PP QB, he would have been moving, going to an open area and rotating with the other 4 Hawks out there to create a true goal-scoring opportunity while on the 2 man advantage. Instead, all of that time was literally wasted.

And instead of the Hawks having a chance to get 2 PP goals, one while up 2 men and while while up 1 man, the time was wasted.

That, to me, is solely on Q for his belief that Duncan Keith in any way, shape or form belongs as the primary go-to QB for the PP.

Absolute idiocy. Someone described Keith earlier in this thread or the previous perfectly -- like a rat on crack.
- savvyone-1

My exact thoughts when that happened. 5 on 3 with 2 and nothing but static perimeter keepaway.

They all were motionless. And #2 was the one who finally moved to open up the ice for Kane to come out high. Now, if you want to complain about his passes to Hossa being off the mark a bit, I agree with you.
- Elbows15

You're really going to give Keith (and Q) a free pass on this???

Wow! Wish you were my coach in juniors. All it would have taken is 1 PP shift like that to get yourself benched for a long time.

I didn't even comment about the not-so-good passes simply because there were way too many of them while we had 5 statues out there.

It IS the job of the PP QB (hence the title) to put the play into motion. Typically that means either moving with OR WITHOUT the puck in order to take advantage of having an extra man in the O zone. One pass or two passes (the most) and then Keith should have skated to some open ice, attempting to rotate the PP unit and get the PK out of position.

If Keith had rotated down as he should have, Hoss would very likely rotated up to the very top -- and with 2 guys moving, the other 3 would have likely filled empty spaces as well, likely presenting an opportunity to shoot from an open area OR to make 1 more pass for an uncontested shot.

Keith's refusal to move for nearly a minute was absolutely infuriating. His responsibility is make (good) things happen -- create a scoring chance for his team -- and you don't do that by standing still.

White House visit, @ Walter Reed?

- Beaver-Warrior

Can we leave Khabby there to DRY OUT ??????

Say it ain't so....

http://prohockeytalk.nbcs...11/04/devils-waive-olesz/

Sorry guys, this one's on Q.

I'm going to point to the most critical part of the game -- 3rd period when the Hawks were on the PP and then the 2nd Calgary penalty was called.

Does anyone remember that sequence? I do.

At the time of the 1st PP, you had the 2nd unit out there with Leddy and Seabrook on the points. As soon as the 2nd penalty was called, it seemed like forever before the faceoff. And lo and behold, who should magically appear on the ice but the beloved 1st unit PP with none other than #2 at the point.

I watched in horror and wanted to put my foot through the set -- watching Keith stand literally motionless passing the puck laterally back and forth to/from Hossa. I could not believe my eyes.

That sonofab i t c h stood almost motionless passing the puck back and forth wasting precious seconds while on the 2 man advantage. Yes, Hossa finally did score, but that was only after over a minute being wasted with this nonsense. And the G came after the 1st penalty had expired.

If Keith had any brains and any ability to be a true PP QB, he would have been moving, going to an open area and rotating with the other 4 Hawks out there to create a true goal-scoring opportunity while on the 2 man advantage. Instead, all of that time was literally wasted.

And instead of the Hawks having a chance to get 2 PP goals, one while up 2 men and while while up 1 man, the time was wasted.

That, to me, is solely on Q for his belief that Duncan Keith in any way, shape or form belongs as the primary go-to QB for the PP.

Absolute idiocy. Someone described Keith earlier in this thread or the previous perfectly -- like a rat on crack.
- savvyone-1

Hey! Keith actully shot the puck once on that powerplay.

You're really going to give Keith (and Q) a free pass on this???

Wow! Wish you were my coach in juniors. All it would have taken is 1 PP shift like that to get yourself benched for a long time.

I didn't even comment about the not-so-good passes simply because there were way too many of them while we had 5 statues out there.

It IS the job of the PP QB (hence the title) to put the play into motion. Typically that means either moving with OR WITHOUT the puck in order to take advantage of having an extra man in the O zone. One pass or two passes (the most) and then Keith should have skated to some open ice, attempting to rotate the PP unit and get the PK out of position.

If Keith had rotated down as he should have, Hoss would very likely rotated up to the very top -- and with 2 guys moving, the other 3 would have likely filled empty spaces as well, likely presenting an opportunity to shoot from an open area OR to make 1 more pass for an uncontested shot.

Keith's refusal to move for nearly a minute was absolutely infuriating. His responsibility is make (good) things happen -- create a scoring chance for his team -- and you don't do that by standing still.
- savvyone-1

Where was he suppose to go? The other 4 guys were taking root on the ice. Funny though, Hossa didn't exactly move his ass either. I know, Leddy would have made it better when he skated around the net and passed to no one. Do I like Keith on PP? Not particularly. But if you think the Hawks are a better team without him, you are sadly mistaken. IMO, the best option on the 5 on 3 is Seabrook. You have enough passers out there. Seabrook can be set up for a one timer on his off wing ala Hossa. It gives them more options. And in case you haven't noticed, Kane is the actual PP QB.

Hey! Keith actully shot the puck once on that powerplay.
- faustus1500

Verdi should write a book and call it: Keith and his Nerf Gun Clapper. It'd be 300 illustrated pages of dented shin pads and puck marks on the backboards. And the foreward could be by some dude named 0.0 shooting %

I think I'm with TG on this one. Q's moves, especially last night, were just infuriating. 2nd game of a back-to-back, against an inferior team, what better game to just roll 4 lines. and he shortens his bench. What was he doing? Was he sending a message about defensive play? Because if he did it failed as the defensive lapses that led to the 2nd goal and winning goal happened while his benched players were benched. Was he worried about not getting goals. The current lines had produced 5 goals a game for the past three games. What was the point? Did Q feel he sent the right message? Would he do it again? These would be great questions to ask Q after the game......you know....if we didn't have a bunch of horn playing seals for beat writers ( Al excluded, of course.)

What helped last year more than anything was the 24 game winning streak. It meant that Q didn't have to point chase the entire season. Now we have games like this ( games that were littered in '11 and '12 as well) where Q goes full throttle playing Toews Sharp, Kane and the like well over 20 minutes in an attempt to get 1 or two extra points. ( I know someone is tempted to respond that every point is important and that a win now will only help in March.....Don't. You make up points during the season all the time by winning games you shouldn't and vice versa so pointing to this one game is beyond silly). Roll your four lines. do your "coaching" during between game skates...
- yahoodi

It sure didn't seem to make a lot of sense while watching what almost literally seemed like a new 3 forward combination each shift. In retrospect, it still seems silly and appropriate fodder for second-guessing of Q, past successes notwithstanding--since we all know coaches who win championships all eventually get fired, thus proving past success does not equal future infallibility. You've got guys playing well for several games in a row, you'd think you'd want to let them continue to play together and gel in a sluggish outing like last night's. All they needed was a lucky bounce, yet the moves reeked of unwarranted desperation. And the boys didn't seem to respond well. We'll see. It's a long season and Q's past successes do equal latitude so we might as well enjoy the season, warts like last night and all, because it's going to happen regardless.

It sure didn't seem to make a lot of sense while watching what almost literally seemed like a new 3 forward combination each shift. In retrospect, it still seems silly and appropriate fodder for second-guessing of Q, past successes notwithstanding--since we all know coaches who win championships all eventually get fired, thus proving past success does not equal future infallibility. You've got guys playing well for several games in a row, you'd think you'd want to let them continue to play together and gel in a sluggish outing like last night's. All they needed was a lucky bounce, yet the moves reeked of unwarranted desperation. And the boys didn't seem to respond well. We'll see. It's a long season and Q's past successes do equal latitude so we might as well enjoy the season, warts like last night and all, because it's going to happen regardless.
- Baaaaaaannerman!

Where was he suppose to go? The other 4 guys were taking root on the ice. Funny though, Hossa didn't exactly move his ass either. I know, Leddy would have made it better when he skated around the net and passed to no one. Do I like Keith on PP? Not particularly. But if you think the Hawks are a better team without him, you are sadly mistaken. IMO, the best option on the 5 on 3 is Seabrook. You have enough passers out there. Seabrook can be set up for a one timer on his off wing ala Hossa. It gives them more options. And in case you haven't noticed, Kane is the actual PP QB.
- Elbows15

Leddy passing to no one. That's laughable. He's created more offensive zone opportunities than the rest of the D put together. Can't help guys not getting in position to receive a pass/take a shot, at least when he does that he's gotten the puck deep in the zone and typically helps in puck possession.

Yes, Hossa did not move either. Not giving him a free pass either but Keith has to move the puck, then move himself. Was almost like a game of chicken between the 2.

Don't read into my comments re Keith on the PP as I never said Hawks would be better off without Keith. My irritation at the moment is Keith on the PP. My own preference would be Leddy and Seabrook both on their off-wing (as they so often do, they move, shifting from side-to-side).

And as you aptly point out, Kane is the focus of the PP -- even more reason to remove Keith from that "role" which he cannot play. Seldom hits the net and appears frozen like a deer in the headlights, same as when he brings the puck out of the zone. No idea of what to do with the puck and that indecision is what usually costs the Hawks on zone entry. Seabrook has much the same MO, the only difference is he usually is smart enough to let Leddy bring the puck out of the zone.

The slow, indecisiveness of Duncan Keith on PP is what chaps my ass.

Verdi should write a book and call it: Keith and his Nerf Gun Clapper. It'd be 300 illustrated pages of dented shin pads and puck marks on the backboards. And the foreward could be by some dude named 0.0 shooting %

- philco28

Classic. IN all seriousness, amazing to me how much the Hawks TV booth protects this guy. For all the "stop it right heres" of Eddie O freeze framing a Kris Versteeg or Hossa of not being in the right position on the PK or protecting their point man, OR how shooters on the shoot outs dont' have the puck "in a shooting position" don't have a chance...you would think he may be willing to rip Keith for standing with his hip at the goalie and facing Hossa like they are playing catch at the blue line in warm ups? Especially on a critical 5 on 3 in the 3rd period of a game you are trailing?

Then again, these were the same 2 guys who blamed the infamous downward swing to Keith's game late in 2010 on a brand new pair of skates.....

Duncan Keith is a fine defenseman, but he is god awful on the point on a power play.

Then again, these were the same 2 guys who blamed the infamous downward swing to Keith's game late in 2010 on a brand new pair of skates.....
- SteveRain

Funniest thing ever. Sure, a multi-million dollar, contracted for life NHL defenseman can't play right because the folks at Bauer couldn't make his custom skates. Good lord, I skate with guys who've bought new blades and literally play with them the same night they've had 'em baked -- and play just as, if not more effectively. But your NHL star D man who has skated all his life can't play right because Bauer didn't make his custom skates quick enough. Boo hoo. Yeah, Eddie, f'ing right.

Duncan Keith is a fine defenseman, but he is god awful on the point on a power play.
- SteveRain

Spot on. Why can't anyone else see this?

Leddy passing to no one. That's laughable. He's created more offensive zone opportunities than the rest of the D put together. Can't help guys not getting in position to receive a pass/take a shot, at least when he does that he's gotten the puck deep in the zone and typically helps in puck possession.

Yes, Hossa did not move either. Not giving him a free pass either but Keith has to move the puck, then move himself. Was almost like a game of chicken between the 2.

Don't read into my comments re Keith on the PP as I never said Hawks would be better off without Keith. My irritation at the moment is Keith on the PP. My own preference would be Leddy and Seabrook both on their off-wing (as they so often do, they move, shifting from side-to-side).

And as you aptly point out, Kane is the focus of the PP -- even more reason to remove Keith from that "role" which he cannot play. Seldom hits the net and appears frozen like a deer in the headlights, same as when he brings the puck out of the zone. No idea of what to do with the puck and that indecision is what usually costs the Hawks on zone entry. Seabrook has much the same MO, the only difference is he usually is smart enough to let Leddy bring the puck out of the zone.

The slow, indecisiveness of Duncan Keith on PP is what chaps my ass.
- savvyone-1

Leddy waits too long to make a pass. He always is indecisive with puck. He just skates fast with it. No one can get in position because no one, including himself, knows wtf he is going. I know you love Leddy cause he can skate, but he will never be more than a 5th or 6th D-man. Hjalmarrson creates more opportunities than Leddy does. Oh, and it would be nice if a D-man knew what he was doing in his own zone.

Funny thing about that Al. If I am not mistaken, I believe Toews, Hossa and Sharp were on the ice when Calgary broke out with puck on Glencross' goal. All of them were below the dots. Not to mention Brookbank giving Glencross way too much space.
- Elbows15

Nope, I was wrong Al. They weren't on the ice.