Will facing Chicago make the Wild better in the long run?

[BigT2002]

I don't see how we get Vanek without giving up Granlund or Zucker or Coyle.

You are most likely correct on that one. And at this point, it would be Granlund. I just cannot see Fletcher axing either Coyle or Zucker now. Especially Zucker. Guy was about the only one with legit chances during this series. Almost won Game 1. Damn near was the equalizer last night.

 

[Dudicles]

I think a good thing is that we do have players that seem to give a rip, and next year I am hoping they will want to do better and go further in the playoffs, and will do what it takes to make it so.

 

[Phant03]

It didn't really matter who they played. Every team has had to go through this process. Hawk won a cup and then had to spend the next two seasons (maybe more) rebuilding their depth and letting their kids "learn to win".

 

[BigT2002]

It didn't really matter who they played. Every team has had to go through this process. Hawk won a cup and then had to spend the next two seasons (maybe more) rebuilding their depth and letting their kids "learn to win".

The difference is they retained their core players. You still had Kane, Toews, Hossa, Sharp, Keith, Hjammerson, Seabrook, Stahlberg, Bickel playing. They let players like Buf, Neimi and others leave because they had faith in their AHL system. Crawford has come a long way and getting Leddy solidified their Top 4 pairings. They needed to fill voids in center and the fourth line. And now the entire depth of the team can score any given time.

Face it, outside of Hossa and Sharp we were beaten by their 3rd line players. Hossa had 5 goals and Sharp had 4. Sharp's came in Game's 2 & 4 and Hossa was what they missed so dearly last playoffs when Torres basically killed him, consistent scoring threat. Kruger, Shaw, Stahlberg, and Bickel were the ones scoring the bigger goals. I think Clutterbuck and Mitchell were the only 2 that scored goals this series not on the top 2 lines.

 

[Phant03]

That's my point? Hawks had their core from their 2010 Cup win and yet still got bounced in the first round the following 2 seasons. Hell, the year after they won the Cup they needed the Wild to beat the Stars just to back into the post season.

 

[651*]

Chicago was just a better team. Period.

 

[IHaveNoCreativity]

I think so. The Hawks have won, we need to learn.

In the long run it will be huge:

 

[nickschultzfan]

Yes.

Wild lost to the Hawks because they had terrible goaltending and went 0 for 17 on the PP, where the Hawks had great goaltending.

That's the difference-maker.

 

[DeuceMN]

How many times this year do we make the opponents goalie look like a Vezina candidate? Then the next team lights them up and they fall back to earth.

This has happened too often over the last two years for it to just be luck or coincidence at this point.

Look at the Sens, with all their injuries this year, yet they somehow persevere and even excel despite their challenges. Hell no. Our coaches are the orchestrators of this, and they deserve a real thorough eyeballing.

This "hot goalie" excuse has me sick at this point.

We have a talented roster. I have seen almost every player on this roster excel in that department at some point, and it was not through luck. We did not work well as a team and that needs to be fixed.

 

[keppel146]

I dont think I ever saw that pace out of the wild this season. I think we can learn a ton from this series