GDT: WCF Game 1: Chicago Blackhawks at Anaheim Ducks, SUN MAY 17, 2015, 2:00 PM CDT

[OhCaptainMyCaptain]

"You cannot expect to go very far"

Dood. We're in the WCF.

 

[zac]

I disagree NFS

Game 2 is a must win as this Hawks team has not shown they can win vs a quality opponent this postseason

A injured Preds team and a overrated Wild team are notding like this Ducks team. If Ducks get 2-0 lead no doubt Getzlaf/Perry/Kesler will put foot down on Hawks neck to try and put them out of misery

You need to change your name to the King of Hyperbole. It's never ending with you.

 

[CptnSerious]

"You cannot expect to go very far"

Dood. We're in the WCF.

Fiddy being Fiddy.

 

[zac]

I'm not worried about the Ducks from a talent perspective. While very talented, I think we have them covered in that department.

What cost us this game and what has cost us over the last several years (when we've failed) is a complete lack of organization on the ice. I'm not talking about rigid schemes that limit our offensive potential, rather a team that plays us a sum of it's parts, one that maintains (especially defensive) responsibility, and one that has proper direction and scheming on special teams units.

Many know I despise Quenneville and have for years. I like his general philosophy of controlling the puck and also think he does a good job of maintaining the locker room despite having a locker room full of stars. Unfortunately Q's weaknesses: his roster management and the aforementioned loom much larger than his strengths. What we saw today was an absolute clinic in superb (on-ice) organization. Anaheim swarmed as a team. They defended as a team. Moreover they are opportunistic as a team. It's no mistake that the Ducks won more 1 goal games than any team in history. They don't have anywhere near the massive amount of **** ups as the Hawks do as a whole.

Many think that Q's job is safe, rather should be safe with a series loss. While I'm not saying I disagree with that it will likely play out that way, I think today was a glaring indictment against Quenneville and his ability to coax better results out of a team as talented as this. He lost us the Kings series last year, and the Hawks don't have the luxury of having a coach that can't run special teams units to save his life, or get his team's to play team defense in which guys aren't skating around like their heads are cut off.

The Hawks may win this series, hell they may go on to win the Cup. I'm not overreacting. But one can't be dismissive of the numerous times Hawks have clearly "outplayed" their opposition only to be undone by a complete lack of organization on the ice.

If this team doesn't beat teams with their skill they have a hard time winning games. Today was hard to watch.

 

[BobbleHeadNight*]

The Hawks ran into a goalie that played an amazing game. This was purely a game where one goalie outplayed the other.

This.

People got to throw their temper tantrums, though, so whatever. It's like people have never watched hockey before, let alone Blackhawks hockey.

 

[BobbleHeadNight*]

I'm not worried about the Ducks from a talent perspective. While very talented, I think we have them covered in that department.

What cost us this game and what has cost us over the last several years (when we've failed) is a complete lack of organization on the ice. I'm not talking about rigid schemes that limit our offensive potential, rather a team that plays us a sum of it's parts, one that maintains (especially defensive) responsibility, and one that has proper direction and scheming on special teams units.

Many know I despise Quenneville and have for years. I like his general philosophy of controlling the puck and also think he does a good job of maintaining the locker room despite having a locker room full of stars. Unfortunately Q's weaknesses: his roster management and the aforementioned loom much larger than his strengths. What we saw today was an absolute clinic in superb (on-ice) organization. Anaheim swarmed as a team. They defended as a team. Moreover they are opportunistic as a team. It's no mistake that the Ducks won more 1 goal games than any team in history. They don't have anywhere near the massive amount of **** ups as the Hawks do as a whole.

Many think that Q's job is safe, rather should be safe with a series loss. While I'm not saying I disagree with that it will likely play out that way, I think today was a glaring indictment against Quenneville and his ability to coax better results out of a team as talented as this. He lost us the Kings series last year, and the Hawks don't have the luxury of having a coach that can't run special teams units to save his life, or get his team's to play team defense in which guys aren't skating around like their heads are cut off.

The Hawks may win this series, hell they may go on to win the Cup. I'm not overreacting. But one can't be dismissive of the numerous times Hawks have clearly "outplayed" their opposition only to be undone by a complete lack of organization on the ice.

If this team doesn't beat teams with their skill they have a hard time winning games. Today was hard to watch.

*yawn*

Hot goalie stole the game. Put your agenda on the shelf and get ready for game 2. Hopefully Q will mismanage, fumble, and luck his way into this 3rd cup in 6 years.

 

[BobbleHeadNight*]

I disagree NFS

Game 2 is a must win as this Hawks team has not shown they can win vs a quality opponent this postseason

What utter nonsense. Take a nap. You're acting like a cross child.

What were you saying down 0-2 to STL last year?

 

[zac]

*yawn*

Hot goalie stole the game. Put your agenda on the shelf and get ready for game 2. Hopefully Q will mismanage, fumble, and luck his way into this 3rd cup in 6 years.

********. Hot goalie my ass. It isn't a coincidence that this team peppers goalies (often with soft shots) or has great opportunities thwarted before a shot even gets on net on such a consistent basis. We pass and cycle well, but otherwise we play like a bunch of individuals scrambling around out there. We waxed Anaheim in the "wow what an individual play department" but in the "that was a great team effort department" we got shellacked.

There's only so many times that can happen before you have to acknowledge that its' not the other team. It's us. If Q had a clue as to how to implement some structure, especially on the defensive side, many of these "the goalie stole the game" games would vanish.

We are mistake prone. Being mistake prone against a team like the Ducks is a problem.

 

[Nothingman*]

There were few second chance shots. Few Hawks willing to put in the work and pay the price around the net. That is the O issue I saw.

D wise.....our bottom two are going to kill us. Let's face it. And I agree that Stan **** the bed on the D selectionQ has. This is all on him if it comes to that by the end of the series.

 

[BobbleHeadNight*]

********. Hot goalie my ass. It isn't a coincidence that this team peppers goalies (often with soft shots) or has great opportunities thwarted before a shot even gets on net on such a consistent basis. We pass and cycle well, but otherwise we play like a bunch of individuals scrambling around out there. We waxed Anaheim in the "wow what an individual play department" but in the "that was a great team effort department" we got shellacked.

There's only so many times that can happen before you have to acknowledge that its' not the other team. It's us. If Q had a clue as to how to implement some structure, especially on the defensive side, many of these "the goalie stole the game" games would vanish.

We are mistake prone. Being mistake prone against a team like the Ducks is a problem.

And you call out BWC for being the king of hyperbole.

Q has much more of a clue that some message board ham and egger has, believe me.

 

[zac]

There were few second chance shots. Few Hawks willing to put in the work and pay the price around the net. That is the O issue I saw.

D wise.....our bottom two are going to kill us. Let's face it. And I agree that Stan **** the bed on the D selectionQ has. This is all on him if it comes to that by the end of the series.

The bigger issue is the forward coverage. We are so out of position on the perimeter that it creates scrambling situations from everyone. That first goal was largely the result of Saad and Hossa taking a change on the other end, and it let to a rush in which only 3 guys (max) had the chance to get back. Once that happened it was a made cluster****, and neither one of our forwards were where they were supposed to be (probably tired from huffing it to get back).

Q talks about forwards being good defensively. He seems to think that's relegated to the neutral zone only, especially when it comes to backchecking and pokechecking. Saad and many other forwards have been able to get away with terrible decision making (low percentage gambles) and piss poor defensive zone coverage/spacing for years. There is absolutely no organization with how we play defense much of the time. That's a problem.

While Rundblad sucked, I thought Keith and Oduya were possibly even bigger problems. Keith was overly passive, while Oduya extended a lot of offensive possessions with poor decision making on clearing/passing attempts. If our guys who get the minutes made better plays/decisions, Rundblad probably isn't put in some of those situations (to fail). I'm not excusing his play, but it was unreasonable to expect him to play great, on the road, after sitting for a month. The other guys however, have no excuses.

 

[iceman58]

I'm not worried about the Ducks from a talent perspective. While very talented, I think we have them covered in that department.

What cost us this game and what has cost us over the last several years (when we've failed) is a complete lack of organization on the ice. I'm not talking about rigid schemes that limit our offensive potential, rather a team that plays us a sum of it's parts, one that maintains (especially defensive) responsibility, and one that has proper direction and scheming on special teams units.

Many know I despise Quenneville and have for years. I like his general philosophy of controlling the puck and also think he does a good job of maintaining the locker room despite having a locker room full of stars. Unfortunately Q's weaknesses: his roster management and the aforementioned loom much larger than his strengths. What we saw today was an absolute clinic in superb (on-ice) organization. Anaheim swarmed as a team. They defended as a team. Moreover they are opportunistic as a team. It's no mistake that the Ducks won more 1 goal games than any team in history. They don't have anywhere near the massive amount of **** ups as the Hawks do as a whole.

Many think that Q's job is safe, rather should be safe with a series loss. While I'm not saying I disagree with that it will likely play out that way, I think today was a glaring indictment against Quenneville and his ability to coax better results out of a team as talented as this. He lost us the Kings series last year, and the Hawks don't have the luxury of having a coach that can't run special teams units to save his life, or get his team's to play team defense in which guys aren't skating around like their heads are cut off.

The Hawks may win this series, hell they may go on to win the Cup. I'm not overreacting. But one can't be dismissive of the numerous times Hawks have clearly "outplayed" their opposition only to be undone by a complete lack of organization on the ice.

If this team doesn't beat teams with their skill they have a hard time winning games. Today was hard to watch.

Good points here. It's all about team play, and the Ducks absolutely played better as a team in game 1.

 

[zac]

And you call out BWC for being the king of hyperbole.

Q has much more of a clue that some message board ham and egger has, believe me.

There's a difference between claiming the sky is falling and singling out one player (even when he's played well at times with stats to back that up), than pointing out a fundamental flaw that has cost this team for years. That's hardly hyperbole.

As for the second sentence...he makes an awful lot of inexcusable mistakes for a guy with that much of a clue. While no one is making a claim that they could run/coach the team, I'd definitely defer to many on this board when it came to certain types of decision making.

Q has proven himself to be clueless in at least a couple facets of the game. If you haven't realized that you are either to "green" or too much of a homer to dissuade.

 

[zac]

There were few second chance shots. Few Hawks willing to put in the work and pay the price around the net. That is the O issue I saw.

D wise.....our bottom two are going to kill us. Let's face it. And I agree that Stan **** the bed on the D selectionQ has. This is all on him if it comes to that by the end of the series.

I would say 40% was us, with 60% being the Ducks superior ability to clear/swarm pucks. They have clearly been better at it than us over the course of the season. Ironically this is probably one of our bigger weaknesses on the other end.

 

[Nothingman*]

The bigger issue is the forward coverage. We are so out of position on the perimeter that it creates scrambling situations from everyone. That first goal was largely the result of Saad and Hossa taking a change on the other end, and it let to a rush in which only 3 guys (max) had the chance to get back. Once that happened it was a made cluster****, and neither one of our forwards were where they were supposed to be (probably tired from huffing it to get back).

Q talks about forwards being good defensively. He seems to think that's relegated to the neutral zone only, especially when it comes to backchecking and pokechecking. Saad and many other forwards have been able to get away with terrible decision making (low percentage gambles) and piss poor defensive zone coverage/spacing for years. There is absolutely no organization with how we play defense much of the time. That's a problem.

While Rundblad sucked, I thought Keith and Oduya were possibly even bigger problems. Keith was overly passive, while Oduya extended a lot of offensive possessions with poor decision making on clearing/passing attempts. If our guys who get the minutes made better plays/decisions, Rundblad probably isn't put in some of those situations (to fail). I'm not excusing his play, but it was unreasonable to expect him to play great, on the road, after sitting for a month. The other guys however, have no excuses.

I agree with Keith looking out of sorts and the first line played pretty poorly as well.

 

[Toews2Bickell]

Hawks will figure out Andersen. If they control the puck possession like they did today, they're going to score a lot of goals. More worried about minute distribution on defense. The whole hits thing is already being blown way out of proportion. Anaheim was chasing the puck most of the game, cool story that they made a lot of small hits.

 

[Crow]

Completely expected this long lay off to cost us a win. I don't think that is exactly what happened but I do expect this team to be much sharper and win the series in 5 or maybe 6.

 

[ReLyT]

just gotta win one game in Anaheim and take care at home... onto the next. No stress

 

[Toews2Bickell]

Completely expected this long lay off to cost us a win. I don't think that is exactly what happened but I do expect this team to be much sharper and win the series in 5 or maybe 6.

I expected Hawks to come out rusty and they actually took it to Anaheim pretty good most of the game. The reason they lost is they couldn't capitalize on PP opportunities and didn't generate enough second opportunities off rebounds. They'll have to go to school on Andersen and figure out his weak spots. The entire game I kept thinking to myself "this is why this team is only a +10 in goal differential and 21st in GAA". The Hawks were dominating the cycle game. The new narrative has quickly become Kesler's "grit and nastiness" and Andersen's "calmness". The Kesler hype is unreal, but whatever.

 

[BrianE]

Hey guys, was not able to see the game and not able to read any posts yet, from talking to my Brother he thought the Hawks were fine but Anderson out played Crow.

Not worried one bit, on to the next one.

 

[OhCaptainMyCaptain]

Ducks were more opportunist in this game. That's how I'll summarize it.

 

[BobbleHeadNight*]

There's a difference between claiming the sky is falling and singling out one player (even when he's played well at times with stats to back that up), than pointing out a fundamental flaw that has cost this team for years. That's hardly hyperbole.

As for the second sentence...he makes an awful lot of inexcusable mistakes for a guy with that much of a clue. While no one is making a claim that they could run/coach the team, I'd definitely defer to many on this board when it came to certain types of decision making.

Q has proven himself to be clueless in at least a couple facets of the game. If you haven't realized that you are either to "green" or too much of a homer to dissuade.

Q is going to be in the hall of fame as a coach. You're going to be nothing more than an arm chair second guesser.

Yep, I'm siding with him.

 

[BobbleHeadNight*]

Hey guys, was not able to see the game and not able to read any posts yet, from talking to my Brother he thought the Hawks were fine but Anderson out played Crow.

Not worried one bit, on to the next one.

Do yourself a favor and don't read the thread. Everyone sucks, was fired, and the series was forfeited.

 

[BrianE]

Completely expected this long lay off to cost us a win. I don't think that is exactly what happened but I do expect this team to be much sharper and win the series in 5 or maybe 6.

Cannot disagree, i see we outshot them, positive sign imo.

 

[BrianE]

Do yourself a favor and don't read the thread. Everyone sucks, was fired, and the series was forfeited.