I'm going to call it with a period to go - 'Hawks are down 5-1 vs. Colorado.  Amazing run had to end sometimes - the question will be if this is one loss or will they take a deep breath and a few games to get back to a normal rhythm?

In response to Bookboy007's comment:

They have hit a few injuries.  I think they have a solid team, will likely add a few pieces and pray their goaltending holds up.  Its a nice run but they have lost gms.  

Thank God.  Finally.  I'm going to enjoy watching this.

I think the Black Hawks aren't that good.

I think the media has over hyped the Black Hawks.

In response to BadHabitude's comment:

not sure i agree with you.  They have three solid lines, a very good backend and a decent goalie tandom.  Crawford would scare me but hes played very well.  I assume the hawks will add a piece or two.  Toews is just so darn good i would never bet against him.  

I think they're very good, and very deep also. It had to end sometime.

Glad I can stop hearing about this.  The Hawks are missing Sharp, but they looked awful.  Avs could've had 10 goals.

Blackhawks Down

Jalvis FTW.

Hawks are very good.  This run had a lot of near misses, but you don't go more than a quarter of a full season without losing a regulation game just because you're popular. 

I don't count a shoot out loss as losing a hockey game.

And Toews is fan-freaking-tastic.  Said it before and I'll say it again - one of the few players the Bruins could trade Bergeron to acquire and I would understand.

They are a good team. No mediocre teams can do what they just did.

However, it's obvious that their best hockey is behind them. While they have every chance to win the cup, it's hard to come back from being that high as a team and to come back to earth. If they have a few more bumps in the road, look for them to struggle to get their mojo back. I wouldn't be surprised if they're a .500 club from here on out.

In response to TheGuyWithDaThing's comment:

 

They are a good team. No mediocre teams can do what they just did.

However, it's obvious that their best hockey is behind them. While they have every chance to win the cup, it's hard to come back from being that high as a team and to come back to earth. If they have a few more bumps in the road, look for them to struggle to get their mojo back. I wouldn't be surprised if they're a .500 club from here on out.

 

How and why is this "obvious"? They have one regulation loss - I think you're trafficing in either wishful thinking or unsubstantiated observation. Either way, it's not "obvious".

 

In response to TheGuyWithDaThing's comment:

I think the opposite might be true.  That losing tonight will make them determined to get right back to winning in order to avoid having exactly what you suggest happen. 

And to think it would the perenial constent-rebuilding-franchise Avs that would do it.

Haven't really followed closely, but "obvious" after this run is not a solid conclusion. The good three lines are what the bruins could be if the 3rd line improves, and Horton gets into gear. Still don't like Claude "carrying Thornton no matter how good he is in the dressing room. He is NOT helping Campbell at all on the ice. Pandolfo is a better choice to re-instate the 4th line's effectiveness.

I've watched the Hawks a few times this yr and they are a very solid team anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool. Their forwards are fast and relentless on the forecheck with loads of skill. The D move the puck quickly and accurately. Their goaltending so far has been good. They are a very good team.

In response to Bookboy007's comment:

 

Jalvis FTW.

Hawks are very good.  This run had a lot of near misses, but you don't go more than a quarter of a full season without losing a regulation game just because you're popular. 

I don't count a shoot out loss as losing a hockey game.

And Toews is fan-freaking-tastic.  Said it before and I'll say it again - one of the few players the Bruins could trade Bergeron to acquire and I would understand.

 

I hope the Bruins and Hawks meet in the finals just so everyone can see Bergeron and Marchand make Toews and Kane look like the Gazoo twins. Bergeron is still one the world's most underrated players. I'm not questioning your assertion either Book. I get why Toews is so highly respected. He deserves every bit of it. I just don't see him doing anything that Bergeron doesn't already bring every night for 1.3 million dollars less. Yes, I know I'm hugely biased.

 

dez, I think it's as simple as this - Toews is the offensive player Bergeron would have become if not for Randy Jones.  He still has the shot and finish that Bergeron has never quite recovered.  As a result, he's just a little more balanced in terms of goals vs. assists, and that makes him slightly more dangerous because you can't sit on the pass or give him the shot as a default option.  And he's one of those guys who seems to consistently raise his game to the level of the stakes. 

Don't get me wrong; I don't underestimate Bergeron.  If you told me they traded Bergeron, McQuaid and a first to get Toews, I'd think the Bruins overpaid a bit.  Bergeron and a first...I might not like it, and I'd be sorry to see PB go, but I'd be more excited to see Toews as a Bruin.

As for salary comparisons, well...they might be a lot closer after the next contract for PB.

In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

I'm having a hard time coming to terms with this too.

At least it wasn't CBJ....