Blackhawks

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Blackhawks

    It is impressive that they are on such a run.  Two things about it.

    1.  I can't wait until they lose in regulation so we can stop hearing about it days before and after each game.

    2.  They have lost three times so far this season in the shootout.  A loss is a loss.  The NHL needs to either eliminate it or count it.  Right now, they're doing both.

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    Kind of tainted when you only play your Conferences.

    Are they really the best NHL team ?  Which Conference is stronger ? Just cannot answer these questions this season since teams only get to play against their own Conference .

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from hangnail. Show hangnail's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    It's possible they're peaking too early.  Remember the B's run in November-December (I think that's when it was) in 2011-2012?  I will say, though, that you don't "win" 17 games in a row by accident - you do have to be pretty good.

    I agree with the shootout point though.  It's strictly for entertainment value.  Maybe they should scrap it at some point and have the 2 skating clowns square off for the final point! Same effect.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    Oh, yes, Hang.  They're playing amazing.  Opponents aside, you can't look past their accomplishments.

    I just think it's silly to hold them up high for a "regulation time" unbeaten streak.  Wins and loses are clearly defined in the NHL now with ties eliminated.  You win or you lose.  There is no gray area.  Or is there...

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from hangnail. Show hangnail's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    There is definitely plenty of gray area.  My guess is the NHL implemented the shootout for 2 reasons - entertainment value and expediting the finish to a game.  I mean, imagine 3,000 school aged kids sitting thru multiple OT's on a school night, with no guarantee that someone will score before midnight...not too mention the added fatigue/injuries to the players.  Agreed that the shootout isn't perfect but the pink hats sure like it!

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    The record to me doesnt mean much, they've played three games in which they lost..You cant compare it to teams before the shootout. They are playing very well though....

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    Crawford has really impressed me allot this year. I don't know who Chicago's goalie coach is or even if they have one but something has changed. I know a goalies stats can look real good on a puck possesion team like the Hawks (See Niemi 2010) but 1.65 GAA and a .933 SV% is damn good, so Corey gets some credit.

    To Hangs point though- How many times has San Jose looked like they were the team to beat during the regular season over, say, the last 5 years ?

    and also lest see if Chiacgo can go through a rash of injuries like other teams have already...

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from boborielly224. Show boborielly224's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    All I know is that my older brother is enjoying the streak.

    Boston only loses in regulation is to Buffalo.

    SJ got off to a quick start and look at them now.

    Carolina slow start but are back in the groove.

    Ottawa good start but injuries may catch up to them.

    But I never did like the new SO system. The 5 minutes OT I like, if the team don't score then no SO just put in the standings as a tie for 1pt.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from brunod. Show brunod's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    Guys it is not about a winning streak it's about the most points to start a season without losing and the Hawks have done it 17 times. They are the team to beat right now and my only question is are the Bruins good enough to beat them with the team we have in a 7 game series for the cup? My answer is no unless we repair our toughness. PP, and our 3rd line. Last year the Bruins toughness helped us score goals and this  lack of toughness has showed on the scoreboard. If the Bruins hope to win the cup they have to fix all these things.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from zamboni24. Show zamboni24's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    In response to brunod's comment:

    Guys it is not about a winning streak it's about the most points to start a season without losing and the Hawks have done it 17 times. They are the team to beat right now and my only question is are the Bruins good enough to beat them with the team we have in a 7 game series for the cup? My answer is no unless we repair our toughness. PP, and our 3rd line. Last year the Bruins toughness helped us score goals and this  lack of toughness has showed on the scoreboard. If the Bruins hope to win the cup they have to fix all these things.



    Not trying to be negative but the question is not if the B's can beat the Hawks in a 7GS but can they not lose to teams like Buffalo (twice)? Yes -- lots of wins and good numbers on paper but they have not totally dominated in most of their wins -- many 1 goal cliffhangers. Quite a few could have gone either way leaving them at 500.

    ALSO -- Getting a lot of looks at Habs on Center Ice -- They are really starting to scare me. Or maybe it's just Michel Therrien's face when the cameras scan the bench area.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from lucdufour. Show lucdufour's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    It is impressive that they are on such a run.  Two things about it.

    1.  I can't wait until they lose in regulation so we can stop hearing about it days before and after each game.

    2.  They have lost three times so far this season in the shootout.  A loss is a loss.  The NHL needs to either eliminate it or count it.  Right now, they're doing both.

     




    I don't like the current points system.  For example, The Rangers end up with the same amount of points (4) in 3 games as the Bruins even though they never beat the B's in regulation.  I'd love to see a system that either rewards a regulation win with 3 points or a system that counts a loss as 0 points.  I'd be even ok with a hybrid 3-2-1-0 system.  3 pts for reg. win, 2 pts for OT/SO win, and 1 pt for SO loss-----0 points for any loss in reg or OT.    This way here the B's would have ended up with 4 points versus the Rangers and the Rnagers would have earned only 3 points.  In the current system, too many teams have bloated point totals. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from No4BobbyOrrGOAT2. Show No4BobbyOrrGOAT2's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    W-L-OT

    17-0-3

    Note that the 0 is in the L column, that would mean 0 losses, that should not be too hard to figure, or is it.

    The Hawks have won the cup recently with the majority of the same players, as have the B's. These 2 teams have their preferred nucleus for their cup runs, the odds of them meeting are not good, but better than the B's meeting the nucks again.

    The B's have won the last 2 meetings against the Hawks, but we all know the reg season means nothing should they both make the gauntlet to the finals.

    Here's to the Chara-Toews matchup.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    In response to No4BobbyOrrGOAT2's comment:

    W-L-OT

    17-0-3

    Note that the 0 is in the L column, that would mean 0 losses, that should not be too hard to figure, or is it.

    The Hawks have won the cup recently with the majority of the same players, as have the B's. These 2 teams have their preferred nucleus for their cup runs, the odds of them meeting are not good, but better than the B's meeting the nucks again.

    The B's have won the last 2 meetings against the Hawks, but we all know the reg season means nothing should they both make the gauntlet to the finals.

    Here's to the Chara-Toews matchup.




    You conveniently left out "L" that goes after the "OT" ...And if you want to get technical theres a nother category called "SOL"...they have 3 of them. These days you either win or lose, thats one reason the shootout was put in, so they didn't win 3 of the games. Which means they.......

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    14-0-0-3 is the other way they can mark it. since they're sol's, prior to the last lockout they would have still gotten the point for the tie. pretty impressive run so far.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    I don't have the budget for the fuss.  I like that team.  I'd love to see a Finals against them. 

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from stinkman. Show stinkman's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    The Blackhawks are playing out of their minds. They are a good team but never thought they would go on a streak like this. I would like everyone else would love to see a B's - hawks final , as I am watching on the NHL Network Alexander O pound his third goal for the hat trick.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from goodnewsbears. Show goodnewsbears's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    In response to brunod's comment:

    Guys it is not about a winning streak it's about the most points to start a season without losing and the Hawks have done it 17 times. They are the team to beat right now and my only question is are the Bruins good enough to beat them with the team we have in a 7 game series for the cup? My answer is no unless we repair our toughness. PP, and our 3rd line. Last year the Bruins toughness helped us score goals and this  lack of toughness has showed on the scoreboard. If the Bruins hope to win the cup they have to fix all these things.




    Who would've guessed Pouliot added so much toughness.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    To be fair, gnb, you can't forget the toughness of Joe Corvo.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    In response to brunod's comment:

    Guys it is not about a winning streak it's about the most points to start a season without losing and the Hawks have done it 17 times.



    Entirely untrue, unless when a team scores less than the other in the shootout, it's not really a loss.

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    Re: the second part.  I don't think a shootout loss is a loss.  You didn't lose a hockey game, you lost a gimmick where you could have won an extra point like a stuffed bear at a carnival game.  I feel the same way about shootout wins.

    At least it is all captured the way the NHL does the standings.  ROW tells you how many wins they'd have had in the old system.  The difference between ROW and wins plus OTL tells you how many ties.  It's not perfect, but at least it does matter at some point when you look at ROW for tiebreakers.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    If Chicago doesn't lose in regulation tonight I don't think they lose for the remainder of the season.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheGuyWithDaThing. Show TheGuyWithDaThing's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    Bruins 2008-2009 = Peaked way too soon and exited in the 2nd round

    Bruins 2011-2012 = Peaked way too soon and exited in the 1st round

    The 2010-2011 Bruins never really peaked or go too low....they had a solid 6-0 road trip where they played well, but didn't dominate from what I recall, and that's the closest they got to peaking in the regular season.

    Teams generally capture their best chemistry just once in a season. And while the 13-2-2 record would suggest that they've peaked....I don't think anyone feels that they have. They've just played solid, consistent hockey, and have a goalie playing really well right now, giving them a chance to win in all but 1 game (which the skaters left him hanging out to dry).

    I like the B's chances this year.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    In response to TheGuyWithDaThing's comment:

    Bruins 2008-2009 = Peaked way too soon and exited in the 2nd round

    Bruins 2011-2012 = Peaked way too soon and exited in the 1st round

    The 2010-2011 Bruins never really peaked or go too low....they had a solid 6-0 road trip where they played well, but didn't dominate from what I recall, and that's the closest they got to peaking in the regular season.

    Teams generally capture their best chemistry just once in a season. And while the 13-2-2 record would suggest that they've peaked....I don't think anyone feels that they have. They've just played solid, consistent hockey, and have a goalie playing really well right now, giving them a chance to win in all but 1 game (which the skaters left him hanging out to dry).

    I like the B's chances this year.




    Media jargon and story creation here.

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ulx3SG0cV3E

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Blackhawks

    I find them hard to root against.  I like how they play physical during the course of the game, but they do not go out of their way to play physical.  They focus on winning hockey games.  Not "being tough to win against" or "trying to make their wins easier".

    They beat you with skill.  ANd are fun to watch.

     

Share