I pin the loss on yet again ZERO Fa-king PP goals.. Hit one of those; the Hawks don't go to OT. For all the talent this team has; how is it they can't score on a man advantage? They are running the same play since 2010.. And I'm a advit hockey fan and can see it.

Sit in the one corner; pass between 3 Forwards, and the 4th forward go skate the other side of the ice; for a backdoor pass..

I pin the loss on yet again ZERO Fa-king PP goals.. Hit one of those; the Hawks don't go to OT. For all the talent this team has; how is it they can't score on a man advantage? They are running the same play since 2010.. And I'm a advit hockey fan and can see it.

Sit in the one corner; pass between 3 Forwards, and the 4th forward go skate the other side of the ice; for a backdoor pass..
- victorymc98

Yup. It's as obvious as the Dennis Gentry draw play on 3rd and long.

Yup. It's as obvious as the Dennis Gentry draw play on 3rd and long.
- Ogilthorpe2

Or any 3rd and long play called when a guy named Turner is your OC.

Or any 3rd and long play called when a guy named Turner is your OC.
- Return of the Roar

Turner MVP of an offense is the Punter.

Crawford didn't even make a mistake on that last goal, that's the thing.
- TKON

I'm with you completely TKON. I've seen plenty of "bad goals" in my life and that was not one of them. Like I said yesterday, if that were a Hawks winner we'd be talking about what pin point, thread the needle shot it was. But since the Hawks lost, it was a softie by Crawford.

Not buying it...

Lets add these to the list - Face Off %
Kruger - 43%
Zeus - 31%
Shaw - 44%

Not good for a "puck Possession" team.
- ksilvy58

Too many other things went wrong on the last play for me to call out Crawford...

Shaw was paralyzed as he thought he would get whistled for tripping...Which he should have.

Oduya let a pass get through from a player on his belly and Stalberg was anything but engaged.

A "lucky"/perfect shot that shouldn't go in near side but....too many other issues to worry about Crawford yet.

Chicago Blackhawks get deserved loss to Wild 3-2 in OT - MY FOX CHICAGO; http://bit.ly/18pnVwV
- Al

Disagree.

Teams get chances against the best defense in the league (which it is).

He totally lost the puck. Can't do that at that point in the game. Happens too ofte nin those situations to him. They are still up and basically in control, though. He can't have any more of those.

The Wild won it more than the Hawks lost it. Gotta have a bigger will.
- John Jaeckel

At some stages - Saad, Leddy, Hammer looked just intimidated.

I loved the response in the 3rd with the game tier - I think they were just over confident in OT and Crawford pulled another OT brain fart.

See how Crow bounces back in game 4. I am confident that Q will have the skaters ready to play after giving up so many shots last night but Crow's psychi will be key.

I'm with you completely TKON. I've seen plenty of "bad goals" in my life and that was not one of them. Like I said yesterday, if that were a Hawks winner we'd be talking about what pin point, thread the needle shot it was. But since the Hawks lost, it was a softie by Crawford.

Not buying it...
- ArlingtonRob

He lost the puck behind the net.

He lost the puck behind the net.
- John Jaeckel

I think you could make the argument that the five players Corey plays with lost the puck for that entire sequence.

And not ONE body check thown by any Hawk player.

I pin the loss on yet again ZERO Fa-king PP goals.. Hit one of those; the Hawks don't go to OT. For all the talent this team has; how is it they can't score on a man advantage? They are running the same play since 2010.. And I'm a advit hockey fan and can see it.

Sit in the one corner; pass between 3 Forwards, and the 4th forward go skate the other side of the ice; for a backdoor pass..
- victorymc98

They're too pretty, Wild are more than glad to have Kane circling around the perimeter looking for a million dollar pass.

We've been watching this ballet off and on since the 2009 WCF (where Detroit played it to a t)

I think you could make the argument that the five players Corey plays with lost the puck for that entire sequence.

And not ONE body check thown by any Hawk player.
- Return of the Roar

Not arguing.

Fault all over the place. But it's not either or.

This goalie plays out of his mind for 59 minutes then gives up bad goals at bad times.

I'd rather have Niemi or a healthy Ray Emery. Sacrilege, I know.

Not arguing.

Fault all over the place. But it's not either or.

This goalie plays out of his mind for 59 minutes then gives up bad goals at bad times.

I'd rather have Niemi or a healthy Ray Emery. Sacrilege, I know.
- John Jaeckel

Not at all. Wish we had 31 back as well.

Too bad the other players on the team did not show up for 59 minutes. We would not be having this conversation.

FIXED
- FourOrr

I'd appreciate it if you didn't fix my words.

ESPECIALLY since you seem not to know what MY word means.

This is the truth right here. The majority of people on this board are waiting(if not hoping) for crawford to fail. I'm not sure how, but everyone ignores that he was awesome his first year in the playoffs against vancouver, including a game 7 where he was the only person that showed up on the entire team.

Was he bad against the coyotes in OT last year? Of course. But two games don't make a career. Like patorioto said, he was excellent in OT of game 1, played great game 2, and had the team on his back again yesterday until he let a bad one in.

Can we stop wasting our time talking about Emery? Hes been good this year, but short of crawford being injured/getting destroyed in multiple games, there is no chance we see him. Also, if we want to look at the year objectively, crawford drew all the tough games, and except when crawford was injured, emery mostly played against "lesser" opponents.

I have a question for everyone, would you feel better about the game yesterday if Keith doesn't score, and they lose 2-1 in regulation? I wouldn't. I'm also sure you guys would be talking about how crawford was down in butterfly when the wild placed two shots perfectly over his shoulder.

Also, if crawfords GAA is under two(like it is right now) at the end of this series, and they somehow lose(which they won't), are you guys going to blame crawford? I'll have a really tough time considering how loaded this team is at forward.
- -Ava-

Yeah, totally logical, ignore the guy who's been to the Cup Finals. Because it doesn't fit the "narrative" that he sucks, needs a walker and Corey is God. Right?

Not at all. Wish we had 31 back as well.

Too bad the other players on the team did not show up for 59 minutes. We would not be having this conversation.
- Return of the Roar

Fair point.

The bright side to this is that there is no way MIN wins the series, and Rocky gets at least one more sellout and the booze and merch sales to go with it.

1. Toews needs to light a fire under Toew's a$$. 1 almost-scored rush for an entire game plus OT does not = leadership.

2. Hossa has been just OK - looks like he is trying to do too much because his linemates aren't up to the task. Better play out of Saad + Toews = more effective Hossa (hence why they looked better when Kane skated with them).

3. Don't understand forcing the stretch pass -- when it's not there, the quick, sure, short outlets and crisp short passes are what is needed. That's on the coaching staff -- even if not in the game plan, they need to recognize it right away and keep reminding them of what they want done.

4. Now you know why they fired Kompon in LA. He's working his magic here too. Getting Duncan Keith off 1st PP duty (and now Hossa on the point as well -- he looks VERY uncomfortable there and made some bad plays in that spot) is 1st order of business. That motha must have it written into his lifetime contract that he gets 1st PP time.

5. Watched the replay in OT. Go watch it again and tell me that is NOT is simply an awful goal to give up, regardless of when, but a killer (obviously) in OT. Yes, C2 played well to get them to OT, but you have to make that stop.

6. See #1 above -- starts with the guy wearing the C on his jersey . . . 'nuff said.

7. Has Q neutered Bollig? Or is he simply too scared to make some big hard hits for fear of stirring up a fight and having Q bench him ("Now Brandon, if you get into a fight, you're going to have your a$$ stapled to this bench for the rest of the game and then you'll see the pressbox for the rest of the series.").

Speaking of which: Q must have really been pissed off with Hjalmarsson's hit on Parise.
Q: "WTF are you doing Nik, you know you're supposed to wave your stick at him!"

8. Sure hope not -- but ALL the C's were horrific on the dot yesterday. IMO, Zus' mojo comes from faceoff wins and controlling the puck/play.

Egads, watching that OT goal was sickening. And for the guys screaming for Leddy to go behind the net, get a clue -- how many goals have you seen scored from behind the cage? That OT winner can't be pinned on Nick, you have several other culprits, beginning with Shaw, Oduya and Stalberg. Watch the replay multiple times if you have to.
- savvyone-1

Can't disagree with a word.

Hey John,

Agreed with some of your blog and disagree with some at the same time. I don't mean to toss my own blog on your website (because I don't do that ever) but this is my perspective on Crawford's goal from a goalie.

I feel some people don't see it from the other side and for me the blame should be on the 5 Hawks who were getting run over by 3 Wild players. Please take note on Stalberg in the video.

Thanks!

http://www.crashthenet.com/?p=3417
- TKON

Saw your blog, also agreed and disagreed, but all good and good of you to check in.

You must love playing that game pin the tail on the donkey - have to have somebody on the Hawks to blame so you have closure in a loss.

Here's who I blame - the 19 other guys on the squad who didn't bring it yesterday and mailed in all but about 10 minutes of that game. They stunk, the Wild played better as a team.
- RickJ

Rick, you are the third or fourth person today who seems not to read what I wrote.

I said - explicitly - that Crawford WAS NOT the main reason they lost.

I said - explicitly - that others were at fault on the final goal.

I said - explicitly - that Crawford was the PROXIMATE cause of the loss.

Please don't put words in my mouth (or, actually, fingers).

I'd appreciate it if you didn't fix my words.

ESPECIALLY since you seem not to know what MY word means.
- StLBravesFan

I understand. You did say he was not the main reason they lost. My bad. I just wanted to emphasize that teams lose in a team game and not any one player.

Too many other things went wrong on the last play for me to call out Crawford...

Shaw was paralyzed as he thought he would get whistled for tripping...Which he should have.

Oduya let a pass get through from a player on his belly and Stalberg was anything but engaged.

A "lucky"/perfect shot that shouldn't go in near side but....too many other issues to worry about Crawford yet.

Chicago Blackhawks get deserved loss to Wild 3-2 in OT - MY FOX CHICAGO; http://bit.ly/18pnVwV
- Al

Grt points Al....but the AntiCraw crowd will never buy it. The play was down low..he was down low in a crouch defending the post...the puck got out along the goal line to his stick side and a seeing eye roof shot got behind his back and the post as he could not react fast enough to get more upright on that play.

Yeah, totally logical, ignore the guy who's been to the Cup Finals. Because it doesn't fit the "narrative" that he sucks, needs a walker and Corey is God. Right?
- John Jaeckel

I never said anything like that, but it does seem like you ignored everything else I said and focused on one sentence, so I understand the confusion.

Rick, you are the third or fourth person today who seems not to read what I wrote.

I said - explicitly - that Crawford WAS NOT the main reason they lost.

I said - explicitly - that others were at fault on the final goal.

I said - explicitly - that Crawford was the PROXIMATE cause of the loss.

Please don't put words in my mouth (or, actually, fingers).
- StLBravesFan

Can't argue on your Proximate Cause statement because forseeability is always there in OT with CC in net.

But, I saw Oduya allow the puck to roll off his stick to Zucker (don't think Cullen knocked it off) and I saw Stalberg with one hand on his twig near the shooter.

Should CC have had it - probably for sure. But kudos go to the shooter - no puck directed at the net for a shot on goal is a bad one. This one found the back of the net and the rest is history.

Can't disagree with a word.
- John Jaeckel

Thanks John, that was really tough to stomach yesterday.

Can't understand the "let's throw our sticks on the ice and they'll simply collapse cause we're the Blackhawks" attitude.

We (finally) see maybe one of the best, clean, hard_separate_the_puck_from_the_puck_carrier_hits from Nik Hjalmarsson yesterday and then he must have gotten a good "talking to" by the coaching staff between periods in front of everyone.

What other excuse could there be? Instead of Nik's "hammer" of Parise (which was simply great BTW -- can we have more of that please?!) being the thing the staff holds up to the rest of the team and says, we want the rest of you guys doing this to their guys, especially Koivu, Suter and Parise -- they must have said, "oh no, can't get yourself out of position by doing that, just use your stick next time to poke check 'em."

I don't know, from my time playing competitive check hockey, getting hit and especially dishing out a big hit was the thing that got me and my teammates stoked to dish out more. What an adrenalin rush! It should be something that fuels the guys -- my guess is, it did -- and the staff took the wind out of their sails.