NHL IS BACK: 2013 NHL Season

[Territorial_Game]

So... animosity in this thread now. Wonder what changed?

 

On a positive note, looks like BabyBourque is off to the KHL!

[1-0-0-1-0-0-1]

Last night was just embarrassing (as a Hawks fan).

 

Still they are in the Finals, right? I guess whenever they lose at any time of the year, I still feel the sting of all those Old Man Wirtz years.

 

Why would you be embarrassed? They lost to a pretty good team, playing at home, 2-0? It's not like they got run out of rink. This has been a great series so far. I hope it only goes two more games of course, but I don't think either team has been embarrassed in any of the games.

 

If the Bruins can hold serve tomorrow night, I'll still be biting my nails. The Hawks have already climbed out of one 3-1 hole this post season, and the Bruins came horrifyingly close to blowing a 3-1 series lead.

 

The score was no indication of how the game was played. I've seen the Hawks when they are firing on all cylinders and that game was a far cry form the play they are capable of. Bad time to show us the poor play.

 

One example, critical power play late in the third, Kane gets the puck onto Keith's stick between the dots. They haven't had the puck there all game. What does Keith decide to do? Pass the puck looking for that pretty play to get Rask out of position. Come on. Just one example indicative of their team play the entire game.

 

You don't think the play of Bruins has anything to do with that?

 

What a silly question. Of course it does, otherwise the Hawks would have scored a goal!

 

Then why call it showing you poor play? Is it poor play to get beat, or did the other team just play better?

It's both. But when you've seen your team play all season, you know when they are not getting the job done, and playing to their strengths, and when they are not. When other teams start shutting down the scoring lanes or holding the Hawks up at the blue line, they try to do too much. They try to make the perfect passes, and make the perfect shots. Its especially apparent in our power play. When the Hawks do that, they eventually realize that they need to "simplify" things. They figured it out in game five against Detroit, and went on to win that game 4-1, and they had been rolling pretty good since then. Now they are playing like they did when they fell behind against the Wings. If the Hawks figure it out, and get back to their game, it's going to get real interesting.

 

Bingo!

 

There's no arguing Boston is a good team. I give them tons of credit showing what they have through these playoffs and I love the original six matchup we have to watch. As Chicago fans, we malign the fact we aren't seeing what we know this team is capable of and what I find "silly" is your insistence that it's all due to Boston. Of course the opponent factors into their playing - it wouldn't be a sport otherwise. The sky is blue and water is wet. Do you think 1980 Team USA would have beat Russia if Russia didn't also play below their capability?

 

I'm so tired of hearing this drivel. Like IA pointed out, when do teams stop suggesting that their vaunted offenses are struggling just because, and start realizing that they're struggling specifically and for no other reason than because the team they're playing has a defense that won't let them do the things they want to do?

 

What's "silly" is not realizing that one possible reason that Kane and Toews and Bickell (and Crosby and Malkin and Nash and Callahan and Kessel and Henrik Sedin, etc.) aren't putting up the eye popping numbers their fans are used to is because of their opponent's defense. Not because they "just can't seem to get it going." Because when they cross the blue line they get "hammered" into the boards, because they get pushed to where they have a bad angle on the net, because the defense blocks their shots.

 

Keep telling yourself that they're just in a rut, and when they put it together, whoa, watch out Boston. You better hope that happens soon though. You're running out of time to impose your will on the Bruins.

 

My apologies to Robert and ILS. I really didn't want to tee off on your team guys.

 

Despite your argument being the complete antithesis of what you rant about (so all the teams Boston has beat have played PERFECTLY - it was purely Boston's skill keeping them down, right? Has nothing to do with a sub-par performance at all, eh?) I think you miss the point as that's not what anyone here has said. It's what you merely wish everyone has said, but its really not. You want to see "drivel" so you get off on it despite two of us Chicago fans saying it's BOTH. Both the team not performing up to par and another team doing a good job of seeing to it. You can't have a competition with one team. That's the point.

 

What are the Hawks going to do when they lose a game? Do they go into the locker room and go "Geez, that Boston team is so damned good, I guess we just cant even compete. We have nothing left to give. We tried as hard as we possibly could. Why do we have to go more games - we simply can't take this punishment anymore?" That's about how silly your rant/attempted argument is. No, they go and say they have more to give, they need to execute better because just like your precious perfect Bruins, they have done it already (faced adversity and came out on top.) Everyone from Q to each fan knows they can play better. To say it's ALL because of the Bruins is just as ignorant as the point you think you're arguing (which again no one has said.)

 

See what happens when you actually give the opponent team props? They can't get their heads out of clouds and want to argue that its not about the Hawks having their heads in their asses. If I recall, you guys were calling for Claude Julien's ass when he almost lost to Toronto in the first round. Now it's all

Can't even diss my own team without the entire East Coast taking offense. Sheesh. I'll bash my under-performing team all I want, so f**k off.

 

Edit: in fact, it would be nice if the hawks BOTH stepped it up and Boston took a night off like they did in Toronto a couple times.

 

You've been here a month, and you're already telling someone to "f**k off"? Could you not do that, please?

[Chicken hawk]

[Rick N. Backer]

Last night was just embarrassing (as a Hawks fan).

 

Still they are in the Finals, right? I guess whenever they lose at any time of the year, I still feel the sting of all those Old Man Wirtz years.

 

Why would you be embarrassed? They lost to a pretty good team, playing at home, 2-0? It's not like they got run out of rink. This has been a great series so far. I hope it only goes two more games of course, but I don't think either team has been embarrassed in any of the games.

 

If the Bruins can hold serve tomorrow night, I'll still be biting my nails. The Hawks have already climbed out of one 3-1 hole this post season, and the Bruins came horrifyingly close to blowing a 3-1 series lead.

 

The score was no indication of how the game was played. I've seen the Hawks when they are firing on all cylinders and that game was a far cry form the play they are capable of. Bad time to show us the poor play.

 

One example, critical power play late in the third, Kane gets the puck onto Keith's stick between the dots. They haven't had the puck there all game. What does Keith decide to do? Pass the puck looking for that pretty play to get Rask out of position. Come on. Just one example indicative of their team play the entire game.

 

You don't think the play of Bruins has anything to do with that?

 

What a silly question. Of course it does, otherwise the Hawks would have scored a goal!

 

Then why call it showing you poor play? Is it poor play to get beat, or did the other team just play better?

It's both. But when you've seen your team play all season, you know when they are not getting the job done, and playing to their strengths, and when they are not. When other teams start shutting down the scoring lanes or holding the Hawks up at the blue line, they try to do too much. They try to make the perfect passes, and make the perfect shots. Its especially apparent in our power play. When the Hawks do that, they eventually realize that they need to "simplify" things. They figured it out in game five against Detroit, and went on to win that game 4-1, and they had been rolling pretty good since then. Now they are playing like they did when they fell behind against the Wings. If the Hawks figure it out, and get back to their game, it's going to get real interesting.

 

Bingo!

 

There's no arguing Boston is a good team. I give them tons of credit showing what they have through these playoffs and I love the original six matchup we have to watch. As Chicago fans, we malign the fact we aren't seeing what we know this team is capable of and what I find "silly" is your insistence that it's all due to Boston. Of course the opponent factors into their playing - it wouldn't be a sport otherwise. The sky is blue and water is wet. Do you think 1980 Team USA would have beat Russia if Russia didn't also play below their capability?

 

I'm so tired of hearing this drivel. Like IA pointed out, when do teams stop suggesting that their vaunted offenses are struggling just because, and start realizing that they're struggling specifically and for no other reason than because the team they're playing has a defense that won't let them do the things they want to do?

 

What's "silly" is not realizing that one possible reason that Kane and Toews and Bickell (and Crosby and Malkin and Nash and Callahan and Kessel and Henrik Sedin, etc.) aren't putting up the eye popping numbers their fans are used to is because of their opponent's defense. Not because they "just can't seem to get it going." Because when they cross the blue line they get "hammered" into the boards, because they get pushed to where they have a bad angle on the net, because the defense blocks their shots.

 

Keep telling yourself that they're just in a rut, and when they put it together, whoa, watch out Boston. You better hope that happens soon though. You're running out of time to impose your will on the Bruins.

 

My apologies to Robert and ILS. I really didn't want to tee off on your team guys.

I think you're right. The Bruins have been a lot more physical than L.A. or Detroit. I see our defensemen hurry plays in our zone, afraid of getting hit, making bad passes. I've seen them do it during the regular season but not to this extent. Even with that, the games have been close and the main problem for us has been getting our forwards to create (difficult because of Quenneville's line changing) Speed is the only answer. We need to get Chara and others tired (again difficult when Kane has to wait for Handzus the turtle to keep up) If we fail to outrace Boston, the series is lost.

 

I don't know if I posted the thought somewhere in the last few pages, but I thought that the Hawks seemed to be moving the puck too quickly in the ovetime in game 2, maybe for the reason you mentioned. The first period of game 2 looked like a 20 minute power play for you guys. But for Rask, that game was on the verge of getting out of hand quickly.

 

Tonight is really the pivotal game in my view. I'd love to see the Bruins close the series in 5 obviously, but I am not expecting them to win game 5 in Chicago. Which means they have to win tonight and set it up so that game 6 is their opportunity to end it. Beating Chicago twice at home is asking a lot. It's not impossible, but I don't like the odds of that happening. Plus if the Hawks reclaim home ice, I think the momentum swing would be enormous.

[blackhawkrush]

Last night was just embarrassing (as a Hawks fan).

 

Still they are in the Finals, right? I guess whenever they lose at any time of the year, I still feel the sting of all those Old Man Wirtz years.

 

Why would you be embarrassed? They lost to a pretty good team, playing at home, 2-0? It's not like they got run out of rink. This has been a great series so far. I hope it only goes two more games of course, but I don't think either team has been embarrassed in any of the games.

 

If the Bruins can hold serve tomorrow night, I'll still be biting my nails. The Hawks have already climbed out of one 3-1 hole this post season, and the Bruins came horrifyingly close to blowing a 3-1 series lead.

 

The score was no indication of how the game was played. I've seen the Hawks when they are firing on all cylinders and that game was a far cry form the play they are capable of. Bad time to show us the poor play.

 

One example, critical power play late in the third, Kane gets the puck onto Keith's stick between the dots. They haven't had the puck there all game. What does Keith decide to do? Pass the puck looking for that pretty play to get Rask out of position. Come on. Just one example indicative of their team play the entire game.

 

You don't think the play of Bruins has anything to do with that?

 

What a silly question. Of course it does, otherwise the Hawks would have scored a goal!

 

Then why call it showing you poor play? Is it poor play to get beat, or did the other team just play better?

It's both. But when you've seen your team play all season, you know when they are not getting the job done, and playing to their strengths, and when they are not. When other teams start shutting down the scoring lanes or holding the Hawks up at the blue line, they try to do too much. They try to make the perfect passes, and make the perfect shots. Its especially apparent in our power play. When the Hawks do that, they eventually realize that they need to "simplify" things. They figured it out in game five against Detroit, and went on to win that game 4-1, and they had been rolling pretty good since then. Now they are playing like they did when they fell behind against the Wings. If the Hawks figure it out, and get back to their game, it's going to get real interesting.

 

Bingo!

 

There's no arguing Boston is a good team. I give them tons of credit showing what they have through these playoffs and I love the original six matchup we have to watch. As Chicago fans, we malign the fact we aren't seeing what we know this team is capable of and what I find "silly" is your insistence that it's all due to Boston. Of course the opponent factors into their playing - it wouldn't be a sport otherwise. The sky is blue and water is wet. Do you think 1980 Team USA would have beat Russia if Russia didn't also play below their capability?

 

I'm so tired of hearing this drivel. Like IA pointed out, when do teams stop suggesting that their vaunted offenses are struggling just because, and start realizing that they're struggling specifically and for no other reason than because the team they're playing has a defense that won't let them do the things they want to do?

 

What's "silly" is not realizing that one possible reason that Kane and Toews and Bickell (and Crosby and Malkin and Nash and Callahan and Kessel and Henrik Sedin, etc.) aren't putting up the eye popping numbers their fans are used to is because of their opponent's defense. Not because they "just can't seem to get it going." Because when they cross the blue line they get "hammered" into the boards, because they get pushed to where they have a bad angle on the net, because the defense blocks their shots.

 

Keep telling yourself that they're just in a rut, and when they put it together, whoa, watch out Boston. You better hope that happens soon though. You're running out of time to impose your will on the Bruins.

 

My apologies to Robert and ILS. I really didn't want to tee off on your team guys.

I think you're right. The Bruins have been a lot more physical than L.A. or Detroit. I see our defensemen hurry plays in our zone, afraid of getting hit, making bad passes. I've seen them do it during the regular season but not to this extent. Even with that, the games have been close and the main problem for us has been getting our forwards to create (difficult because of Quenneville's line changing) Speed is the only answer. We need to get Chara and others tired (again difficult when Kane has to wait for Handzus the turtle to keep up) If we fail to outrace Boston, the series is lost.

 

I don't know if I posted the thought somewhere in the last few pages, but I thought that the Hawks seemed to be moving the puck too quickly in the ovetime in game 2, maybe for the reason you mentioned. The first period of game 2 looked like a 20 minute power play for you guys. But for Rask, that game was on the verge of getting out of hand quickly.

 

Tonight is really the pivotal game in my view. I'd love to see the Bruins close the series in 5 obviously, but I am not expecting them to win game 5 in Chicago. Which means they have to win tonight and set it up so that game 6 is their opportunity to end it. Beating Chicago twice at home is asking a lot. It's not impossible, but I don't like the odds of that happening. Plus if the Hawks reclaim home ice, I think the momentum swing would be enormous.

I have to say I didn't mind the way Hawks played in the first two overtimes in game 1. I thought we were pressing the Bruins while they waited for counterattack opportunities. Boston had more chances in that stretch but I still liked the way we looked, if that makes any sense. The really crazy line mixing came in game 3 after we lost the second game. Too bad we didn't get that second goal in the beginning of game 2. All that ref had to do was look at the corners of the net before blowing the whistle. The puck was in. I expect tonight to be stressful once again.

[Rick N. Backer]

Last night was just embarrassing (as a Hawks fan).

 

Still they are in the Finals, right? I guess whenever they lose at any time of the year, I still feel the sting of all those Old Man Wirtz years.

 

Why would you be embarrassed? They lost to a pretty good team, playing at home, 2-0? It's not like they got run out of rink. This has been a great series so far. I hope it only goes two more games of course, but I don't think either team has been embarrassed in any of the games.

 

If the Bruins can hold serve tomorrow night, I'll still be biting my nails. The Hawks have already climbed out of one 3-1 hole this post season, and the Bruins came horrifyingly close to blowing a 3-1 series lead.

 

The score was no indication of how the game was played. I've seen the Hawks when they are firing on all cylinders and that game was a far cry form the play they are capable of. Bad time to show us the poor play.

 

One example, critical power play late in the third, Kane gets the puck onto Keith's stick between the dots. They haven't had the puck there all game. What does Keith decide to do? Pass the puck looking for that pretty play to get Rask out of position. Come on. Just one example indicative of their team play the entire game.

 

You don't think the play of Bruins has anything to do with that?

 

What a silly question. Of course it does, otherwise the Hawks would have scored a goal!

 

Then why call it showing you poor play? Is it poor play to get beat, or did the other team just play better?

It's both. But when you've seen your team play all season, you know when they are not getting the job done, and playing to their strengths, and when they are not. When other teams start shutting down the scoring lanes or holding the Hawks up at the blue line, they try to do too much. They try to make the perfect passes, and make the perfect shots. Its especially apparent in our power play. When the Hawks do that, they eventually realize that they need to "simplify" things. They figured it out in game five against Detroit, and went on to win that game 4-1, and they had been rolling pretty good since then. Now they are playing like they did when they fell behind against the Wings. If the Hawks figure it out, and get back to their game, it's going to get real interesting.

 

Bingo!

 

There's no arguing Boston is a good team. I give them tons of credit showing what they have through these playoffs and I love the original six matchup we have to watch. As Chicago fans, we malign the fact we aren't seeing what we know this team is capable of and what I find "silly" is your insistence that it's all due to Boston. Of course the opponent factors into their playing - it wouldn't be a sport otherwise. The sky is blue and water is wet. Do you think 1980 Team USA would have beat Russia if Russia didn't also play below their capability?

 

I'm so tired of hearing this drivel. Like IA pointed out, when do teams stop suggesting that their vaunted offenses are struggling just because, and start realizing that they're struggling specifically and for no other reason than because the team they're playing has a defense that won't let them do the things they want to do?

 

What's "silly" is not realizing that one possible reason that Kane and Toews and Bickell (and Crosby and Malkin and Nash and Callahan and Kessel and Henrik Sedin, etc.) aren't putting up the eye popping numbers their fans are used to is because of their opponent's defense. Not because they "just can't seem to get it going." Because when they cross the blue line they get "hammered" into the boards, because they get pushed to where they have a bad angle on the net, because the defense blocks their shots.

 

Keep telling yourself that they're just in a rut, and when they put it together, whoa, watch out Boston. You better hope that happens soon though. You're running out of time to impose your will on the Bruins.

 

My apologies to Robert and ILS. I really didn't want to tee off on your team guys.

I think you're right. The Bruins have been a lot more physical than L.A. or Detroit. I see our defensemen hurry plays in our zone, afraid of getting hit, making bad passes. I've seen them do it during the regular season but not to this extent. Even with that, the games have been close and the main problem for us has been getting our forwards to create (difficult because of Quenneville's line changing) Speed is the only answer. We need to get Chara and others tired (again difficult when Kane has to wait for Handzus the turtle to keep up) If we fail to outrace Boston, the series is lost.

 

I don't know if I posted the thought somewhere in the last few pages, but I thought that the Hawks seemed to be moving the puck too quickly in the ovetime in game 2, maybe for the reason you mentioned. The first period of game 2 looked like a 20 minute power play for you guys. But for Rask, that game was on the verge of getting out of hand quickly.

 

Tonight is really the pivotal game in my view. I'd love to see the Bruins close the series in 5 obviously, but I am not expecting them to win game 5 in Chicago. Which means they have to win tonight and set it up so that game 6 is their opportunity to end it. Beating Chicago twice at home is asking a lot. It's not impossible, but I don't like the odds of that happening. Plus if the Hawks reclaim home ice, I think the momentum swing would be enormous.

I have to say I didn't mind the way Hawks played in the first two overtimes in game 1. I thought we were pressing the Bruins while they waited for counterattack opportunities. Boston had more chances in that stretch but I still liked the way we looked, if that makes any sense. The really crazy line mixing came in game 3 after we lost the second game. Too bad we didn't get that second goal in the beginning of game 2. All that ref had to do was look at the corners of the net before blowing the whistle. The puck was in. I expect tonight to be stressful once again.

 

Stressful indeed.

 

I agree that the second goal would have been huge in game 2, not just because of the final score, but psychologically. When Kelly scored to tie it, though they'd never admit it, I'm sure some of the Hawks were thinking "What the *$%# do we have to do to put these guys away?" after that first period they had.

 

Hossa is playing again tonight. I thought Smith played well for you. He must have come from a good college program.

[mrvander]

Stressful indeed.

 

I agree that the second goal would have been huge in game 2, not just because of the final score, but psychologically. When Kelly scored to tie it, though they'd never admit it, I'm sure some of the Hawks were thinking "What the *$%# do we have to do to put these guys away?" after that first period they had.

 

Hossa is playing again tonight. I thought Smith played well for you. He must have come from a good college program.

 

Don't you think his parents had something to do with that?

 

Seriously though, I think both teams are seeing some beyond-excellent goaltending. Game 3 should have been a rout by the Bruins but it was only 2-0. Hawks certainly need to solve Rask when they get their chances.

[blackhawkrush]

Last night was just embarrassing (as a Hawks fan).

 

Still they are in the Finals, right? I guess whenever they lose at any time of the year, I still feel the sting of all those Old Man Wirtz years.

 

Why would you be embarrassed? They lost to a pretty good team, playing at home, 2-0? It's not like they got run out of rink. This has been a great series so far. I hope it only goes two more games of course, but I don't think either team has been embarrassed in any of the games.

 

If the Bruins can hold serve tomorrow night, I'll still be biting my nails. The Hawks have already climbed out of one 3-1 hole this post season, and the Bruins came horrifyingly close to blowing a 3-1 series lead.

 

The score was no indication of how the game was played. I've seen the Hawks when they are firing on all cylinders and that game was a far cry form the play they are capable of. Bad time to show us the poor play.

 

One example, critical power play late in the third, Kane gets the puck onto Keith's stick between the dots. They haven't had the puck there all game. What does Keith decide to do? Pass the puck looking for that pretty play to get Rask out of position. Come on. Just one example indicative of their team play the entire game.

 

You don't think the play of Bruins has anything to do with that?

 

What a silly question. Of course it does, otherwise the Hawks would have scored a goal!

 

Then why call it showing you poor play? Is it poor play to get beat, or did the other team just play better?

It's both. But when you've seen your team play all season, you know when they are not getting the job done, and playing to their strengths, and when they are not. When other teams start shutting down the scoring lanes or holding the Hawks up at the blue line, they try to do too much. They try to make the perfect passes, and make the perfect shots. Its especially apparent in our power play. When the Hawks do that, they eventually realize that they need to "simplify" things. They figured it out in game five against Detroit, and went on to win that game 4-1, and they had been rolling pretty good since then. Now they are playing like they did when they fell behind against the Wings. If the Hawks figure it out, and get back to their game, it's going to get real interesting.

 

Bingo!

 

There's no arguing Boston is a good team. I give them tons of credit showing what they have through these playoffs and I love the original six matchup we have to watch. As Chicago fans, we malign the fact we aren't seeing what we know this team is capable of and what I find "silly" is your insistence that it's all due to Boston. Of course the opponent factors into their playing - it wouldn't be a sport otherwise. The sky is blue and water is wet. Do you think 1980 Team USA would have beat Russia if Russia didn't also play below their capability?

 

I'm so tired of hearing this drivel. Like IA pointed out, when do teams stop suggesting that their vaunted offenses are struggling just because, and start realizing that they're struggling specifically and for no other reason than because the team they're playing has a defense that won't let them do the things they want to do?

 

What's "silly" is not realizing that one possible reason that Kane and Toews and Bickell (and Crosby and Malkin and Nash and Callahan and Kessel and Henrik Sedin, etc.) aren't putting up the eye popping numbers their fans are used to is because of their opponent's defense. Not because they "just can't seem to get it going." Because when they cross the blue line they get "hammered" into the boards, because they get pushed to where they have a bad angle on the net, because the defense blocks their shots.

 

Keep telling yourself that they're just in a rut, and when they put it together, whoa, watch out Boston. You better hope that happens soon though. You're running out of time to impose your will on the Bruins.

 

My apologies to Robert and ILS. I really didn't want to tee off on your team guys.

I think you're right. The Bruins have been a lot more physical than L.A. or Detroit. I see our defensemen hurry plays in our zone, afraid of getting hit, making bad passes. I've seen them do it during the regular season but not to this extent. Even with that, the games have been close and the main problem for us has been getting our forwards to create (difficult because of Quenneville's line changing) Speed is the only answer. We need to get Chara and others tired (again difficult when Kane has to wait for Handzus the turtle to keep up) If we fail to outrace Boston, the series is lost.

 

I don't know if I posted the thought somewhere in the last few pages, but I thought that the Hawks seemed to be moving the puck too quickly in the ovetime in game 2, maybe for the reason you mentioned. The first period of game 2 looked like a 20 minute power play for you guys. But for Rask, that game was on the verge of getting out of hand quickly.

 

Tonight is really the pivotal game in my view. I'd love to see the Bruins close the series in 5 obviously, but I am not expecting them to win game 5 in Chicago. Which means they have to win tonight and set it up so that game 6 is their opportunity to end it. Beating Chicago twice at home is asking a lot. It's not impossible, but I don't like the odds of that happening. Plus if the Hawks reclaim home ice, I think the momentum swing would be enormous.

I have to say I didn't mind the way Hawks played in the first two overtimes in game 1. I thought we were pressing the Bruins while they waited for counterattack opportunities. Boston had more chances in that stretch but I still liked the way we looked, if that makes any sense. The really crazy line mixing came in game 3 after we lost the second game. Too bad we didn't get that second goal in the beginning of game 2. All that ref had to do was look at the corners of the net before blowing the whistle. The puck was in. I expect tonight to be stressful once again.

 

Stressful indeed.

 

I agree that the second goal would have been huge in game 2, not just because of the final score, but psychologically. When Kelly scored to tie it, though they'd never admit it, I'm sure some of the Hawks were thinking "What the *$%# do we have to do to put these guys away?" after that first period they had.

 

Hossa is playing again tonight. I thought Smith played well for you. He must have come from a good college program.

When I first heard about Hossa, the thought of him just wanting to take a few extra days off did cross my mind but then I dismissed it because this is the final. If he dominates the ice tonight, the way he can at times, it may be the right move. After all, we were only hoping for a split in Boston. Smith had a great year at Rockford and he's shown some skills in the playoffs two years ago. I'm not sure if Morin would not have been the better choice, though. He's a Roenick-type player, who can mix it up in the corners, which is something we really need.

[blackhawkrush]

Hawks lines for tonight: Kane-Toews-Bickell,( :banana:) Sharp-Handzus-Mayers, Shaw-Stalberg-Saad, Bolland-Frolik-Kruger. Hossa was not on the ice for practice. Hopefully Mayers is just a decoy and Marian still plays.

[mrvander]

Hawks lines for tonight: Kane-Toews-Bickell,( :banana:) Sharp-Handzus-Mayers, Shaw-Stalberg-Saad, Bolland-Frolik-Kruger. Hossa was not on the ice for practice. Hopefully Mayers is just a decoy and Marian still plays.

 

Hmmm...is Bolland losing a bit of ice time due to his penalty hat trick last game?

[blackhawkrush]

Hawks lines for tonight: Kane-Toews-Bickell,( :banana:) Sharp-Handzus-Mayers, Shaw-Stalberg-Saad, Bolland-Frolik-Kruger. Hossa was not on the ice for practice. Hopefully Mayers is just a decoy and Marian still plays.

 

Hmmm...is Bolland losing a bit of ice time due to his penalty hat trick last game?

Bolland has played with Frolik and Kruger in these playoffs already and I kinda like that blue-collar line. :madra:

[ILSnwdog]

Hossa is playing again tonight. I thought Smith played well for you. He must have come from a good college program.

Smith is a talented player. Don't know why he hasn't been able to stay up with the club. But even Smith on his best day doesn't compare to what Hossa can do.

[Rick N. Backer]

Last night was just embarrassing (as a Hawks fan).

 

Still they are in the Finals, right? I guess whenever they lose at any time of the year, I still feel the sting of all those Old Man Wirtz years.

 

Why would you be embarrassed? They lost to a pretty good team, playing at home, 2-0? It's not like they got run out of rink. This has been a great series so far. I hope it only goes two more games of course, but I don't think either team has been embarrassed in any of the games.

 

If the Bruins can hold serve tomorrow night, I'll still be biting my nails. The Hawks have already climbed out of one 3-1 hole this post season, and the Bruins came horrifyingly close to blowing a 3-1 series lead.

 

The score was no indication of how the game was played. I've seen the Hawks when they are firing on all cylinders and that game was a far cry form the play they are capable of. Bad time to show us the poor play.

 

One example, critical power play late in the third, Kane gets the puck onto Keith's stick between the dots. They haven't had the puck there all game. What does Keith decide to do? Pass the puck looking for that pretty play to get Rask out of position. Come on. Just one example indicative of their team play the entire game.

 

You don't think the play of Bruins has anything to do with that?

 

What a silly question. Of course it does, otherwise the Hawks would have scored a goal!

 

Then why call it showing you poor play? Is it poor play to get beat, or did the other team just play better?

It's both. But when you've seen your team play all season, you know when they are not getting the job done, and playing to their strengths, and when they are not. When other teams start shutting down the scoring lanes or holding the Hawks up at the blue line, they try to do too much. They try to make the perfect passes, and make the perfect shots. Its especially apparent in our power play. When the Hawks do that, they eventually realize that they need to "simplify" things. They figured it out in game five against Detroit, and went on to win that game 4-1, and they had been rolling pretty good since then. Now they are playing like they did when they fell behind against the Wings. If the Hawks figure it out, and get back to their game, it's going to get real interesting.

 

Bingo!

 

There's no arguing Boston is a good team. I give them tons of credit showing what they have through these playoffs and I love the original six matchup we have to watch. As Chicago fans, we malign the fact we aren't seeing what we know this team is capable of and what I find "silly" is your insistence that it's all due to Boston. Of course the opponent factors into their playing - it wouldn't be a sport otherwise. The sky is blue and water is wet. Do you think 1980 Team USA would have beat Russia if Russia didn't also play below their capability?

 

I'm so tired of hearing this drivel. Like IA pointed out, when do teams stop suggesting that their vaunted offenses are struggling just because, and start realizing that they're struggling specifically and for no other reason than because the team they're playing has a defense that won't let them do the things they want to do?

 

What's "silly" is not realizing that one possible reason that Kane and Toews and Bickell (and Crosby and Malkin and Nash and Callahan and Kessel and Henrik Sedin, etc.) aren't putting up the eye popping numbers their fans are used to is because of their opponent's defense. Not because they "just can't seem to get it going." Because when they cross the blue line they get "hammered" into the boards, because they get pushed to where they have a bad angle on the net, because the defense blocks their shots.

 

Keep telling yourself that they're just in a rut, and when they put it together, whoa, watch out Boston. You better hope that happens soon though. You're running out of time to impose your will on the Bruins.

 

My apologies to Robert and ILS. I really didn't want to tee off on your team guys.

I think you're right. The Bruins have been a lot more physical than L.A. or Detroit. I see our defensemen hurry plays in our zone, afraid of getting hit, making bad passes. I've seen them do it during the regular season but not to this extent. Even with that, the games have been close and the main problem for us has been getting our forwards to create (difficult because of Quenneville's line changing) Speed is the only answer. We need to get Chara and others tired (again difficult when Kane has to wait for Handzus the turtle to keep up) If we fail to outrace Boston, the series is lost.

 

I don't know if I posted the thought somewhere in the last few pages, but I thought that the Hawks seemed to be moving the puck too quickly in the ovetime in game 2, maybe for the reason you mentioned. The first period of game 2 looked like a 20 minute power play for you guys. But for Rask, that game was on the verge of getting out of hand quickly.

 

Tonight is really the pivotal game in my view. I'd love to see the Bruins close the series in 5 obviously, but I am not expecting them to win game 5 in Chicago. Which means they have to win tonight and set it up so that game 6 is their opportunity to end it. Beating Chicago twice at home is asking a lot. It's not impossible, but I don't like the odds of that happening. Plus if the Hawks reclaim home ice, I think the momentum swing would be enormous.

I have to say I didn't mind the way Hawks played in the first two overtimes in game 1. I thought we were pressing the Bruins while they waited for counterattack opportunities. Boston had more chances in that stretch but I still liked the way we looked, if that makes any sense. The really crazy line mixing came in game 3 after we lost the second game. Too bad we didn't get that second goal in the beginning of game 2. All that ref had to do was look at the corners of the net before blowing the whistle. The puck was in. I expect tonight to be stressful once again.

 

Stressful indeed.

 

I agree that the second goal would have been huge in game 2, not just because of the final score, but psychologically. When Kelly scored to tie it, though they'd never admit it, I'm sure some of the Hawks were thinking "What the *$%# do we have to do to put these guys away?" after that first period they had.

 

Hossa is playing again tonight. I thought Smith played well for you. He must have come from a good college program.

When I first heard about Hossa, the thought of him just wanting to take a few extra days off did cross my mind but then I dismissed it because this is the final. If he dominates the ice tonight, the way he can at times, it may be the right move. After all, we were only hoping for a split in Boston. Smith had a great year at Rockford and he's shown some skills in the playoffs two years ago. I'm not sure if Morin would not have been the better choice, though. He's a Roenick-type player, who can mix it up in the corners, which is something we really need.

 

Hayes!

[laughedatbytime]

BOSTON -- Playing the part of Marian Hossa on Wednesday morning: Jamal Mayers.

 

But it's anticipated Hossa will be back to being himself in Game 4 against the Bruins.

 

Though Hossa missed the morning skate at TD Garden on Wednesday, the explosive winger should return to the lineup at a critical point of the Stanley Cup Final.

 

"He's expected to play tonight," Hawks coach Joel Quenneville said. "He's fine."

 

There was some sense from the Blackhawks that a decision again might arrive only after warmups, but Quenneville seemed to kibosh that notion. Hossa and his 15 postseason points are sorely needed, indeed, with the Bruins choking off any offensive momentum for the past 120-plus minutes.

 

"Clearly I'll prepare like I'm going to play, but I anticipate that he'll play," Mayers said. "We need him in there."

 

Meanwhile, captain Jonathan Toews defended Hossa in light of former Hawk Tony Amonte criticizing Hossa's absence from Game 3.

 

"There's no question in our locker room that guys are laying it on the line for each other, and they have been throughout the entire season and playoffs especially," Toews said. "Guys are playing through tons of stuff. There's no question in our locker room that if Hoss could go and he could be effective for us, he would have. If people want to criticize from the outside, that's up to them."

 

The line combinations in general were shaken up, too, in search of a productive attack. Toews skated with Patrick Kane and Bryan Bickell on a presumptive top line, with Michal Handzus centering Patrick Sharp and either Hossa or whoever plays for Hossa.

 

Brandon Saad, Andrew Shaw and Viktor Stalberg skated as a third line and Dave Bolland centered a line with Michael Frolik and Marcus Kruger.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/hockey/blackhawks/chi-marian-hossa-chicago-blackhawks-20130619,0,4832174.story

[blackhawkrush]

Yeah, so if everybody is saying Hossa will play, why was he not skating this morning?

[Territorial_Game]

Yeah, so if everybody is saying Hossa will play, why was he not skating this morning?

 

Too busy playing Mario Kart?

[blackhawkrush]

H :D-13: A :D-13: N :D-13: D :D-13: Z :D-13: U :D-13: S :codger: Hawks 1 Bruins 0

[g under p]

Are the Bruins skating in mud?

[blackhawkrush]

H :D-13: A :D-13: N :D-13: D :D-13: Z :D-13: U :D-13: S :codger: Hawks 1 Bruins 0

Saad. Hawks 1 Bruins 1

[g under p]

That's what I'm talking bout.....1-1 PEVERLY

[1-0-0-1-0-0-1]

H :D-13: A :D-13: N :D-13: D :D-13: Z :D-13: U :D-13: S :codger: Hawks 1 Bruins 0

Saad. Hawks 1 Bruins 1

 

Saad had TWO chances to clear that. That pretty much guarantees a goal against.

[blackhawkrush]

H :D-13: A :D-13: N :D-13: D :D-13: Z :D-13: U :D-13: S :codger: Hawks 1 Bruins 0

Saad. Hawks 1 Bruins 1

 

Saad had TWO chances to clear that. That pretty much guarantees a goal against.

I wanted to sit him down a while back. And what's he doing on the PK, even if there's only about 15 seconds left.

[alphseeker]

WTH Subdivisions on the Organ? :rfl:

[blackhawkrush]

H :D-13: A :D-13: N :D-13: D :D-13: Z :D-13: U :D-13: S :codger: Hawks 1 Bruins 0

Saad. Hawks 1 Bruins 1

T :hi: O :hi: E :hi: W :hi: S :banana: Hawks 2 Bruins 1

[blackhawkrush]

H :D-13: A :D-13: N :D-13: D :D-13: Z :D-13: U :D-13: S :codger: Hawks 1 Bruins 0

Saad. Hawks 1 Bruins 1

T :hi: O :hi: E :hi: W :hi: S :banana: Hawks 2 Bruins 1

K A N E :dweez: Hawks 3 Bruins 1