It's what we've all been waiting for Phil; should be awesome!

Nice to see your stint in the dog house after bolting the reception was a short one.

O6 and two teams that have never faced each other for the Cup. For yours, mine and the health sake of the other posters on this board; I hop we win in 4 or 5!
- HawkintheD

Thanks D...yeah...after a good night sleep all was forgiven. I have a ton of respect for Boston and the matchup is GOLD for intrigue and the caliber of hockey that can be expected.

And I think the Hawks coaching staff should look long and hard to see why the Leafs gave the Bruins all they could handle. Use their speed to force the Bruin defence and forwards into giveaways, driving the net, showing Chara zero respect, and getting into Rask's grill to see if he can't self destruct. One area that is crucial to the Hawks is to try to antagonize but not let the Bruins antagonize them. Do the Christian thing and turn the other cheek, unless the Hawks can build a good lead then it's back to the Torah for an eye for an eye!
- paulr

This is my keys to the series Paulrr.

The Hawks need to skate away from every cheap shot. Every time Shaw goes for a line change he will get bumped or get a stick to the ribs , he needs to just go sit his ass down . If you start seeing the Hawks take stupid penalties the Bruins will win this series.

The Bruins will have a hard time scoring on the Blackhawks.

Besides the 6 goal outburst in game 2 , when Pittsburgh went mental and their goalies were the worst of the playoffs thenBruins scored 3 , 2 , and 1 goals against the terrible Pittsburgh Defense.

The bruins have not played anyone like the Hawks top 4 this post season.

A team like the Bruins that relays on hard work and system can be introuble if in games 1 and 2 they sit back and wait to see what the Hawks are doing offensively and while trying to react. System can be trumped by superior skill.

The Hawks have figured out Howard and Quick. Rask is playing out of his mind but I imagine the Hawks will score on him too. He is no Jimmy Howard or JQuick.

The Hawks will work to get to the front of the net , especially Shaw And Bickell and Toews. The Penguins had zero net front presence. The Hawks will not be kept from the front of the net. If the Leafs can cause havoc around the net so can the Hawks. The Leafs failed to block shots and clear the zone with the puck in the final 5 minutes of game 7. The Hawks will block shots and the Hawks D has a lot more skill and speed than the Lafs D to get pucks out.

If the Hawks "try hard" and the "try Hard" Bruins try hard the Hawks skill will win them their 2nd Stanley Cup in 4 years..... Then the Hawks would actually be following the Redwing Model.....

Marchand, Shaw and Bolland all play that game and all will play better when they do. All of them are capable of restraining themselves when they are winning but all are more than capable of losing it when they are losing.
- paulr

Agreed.... but Marchand sometimes can't restrain himself... EVER lol

Thanks D...yeah...after a good night sleep all was forgiven. I have a ton of respect for Boston and the matchup is GOLD for intrigue and the caliber of hockey that can be expected.
- philco28

Agreed. The two best teams are in the Stanley Cup.

Thanks D...yeah...after a good night sleep all was forgiven. I have a ton of respect for Boston and the matchup is GOLD for intrigue and the caliber of hockey that can be expected.
- philco28

Toews V Bergeron
Chara & Seids V Keith & Seabrook
2 Great Team Defense
Scoring from multiple sources
2 goalies who were doubted, now playing very well
Original 6

So many things that are fantastic about this match-up

Agreed.... but Marchand sometimes can't restrain himself... EVER lol
- MrBeanTown

Marchand

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TEh53OWz0jU

Marchand

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TEh53OWz0jU
- mrpaulish

This SCF must be the hardest pill for a Vancouver fan to swallow....

Toews V Bergeron
Chara & Seids V Keith & Seabrook
2 Great Team Defense
Scoring from multiple sources
2 goalies who were doubted, now playing very well
Original 6

So many things that are fantastic about this match-up
- MrBeanTown

Yes INDEED...and TWO GREAT WORKING CLASS CITIES

This SCF must be the hardest pill for a Vancouver fan to swallow....
- MrBeanTown

Lol. Vancouver . Lol

Congrats on beating the Kings. Neither team had a chance against Boston. They are just firing on all cylinders since the game 7 win in the first round. You will probably give them a little more fight than the Penguins.

Boston is going to steam roll the Hawks.. For Boston this will be like fishing in a barrel.. I am not saying the Hawks are not good, just not as good as the Bruins....

I am going to say what you already know but cant say since you are a Hawks blogger, Boston in 5.
- puckindnet

You actually used the word "steamroll" in seriousness..


Try actually giving some reasons why you think the Bruins will "steamroll" the Hawks and then maybe you won't get ripped.

The only people that I've seen predict a short series are Bruins fans or bitter Kings or Canucks fans.

You actually used the word "steamroll" in seriousness..


Try actually giving some reasons why you think the Bruins will "steamroll" the Hawks and then maybe you won't get ripped.

The only people that I've seen predict a short series are Bruins fans or bitter Kings or Canucks fans.
- patorioto

I don't think any "REAL" Bruins fans are predicting a short series

Toews V Bergeron
Chara & Seids V Keith & Seabrook
2 Great Team Defense
Scoring from multiple sources
2 goalies who were doubted, now playing very well
Original 6

So many things that are fantastic about this match-up
- MrBeanTown

Great synopsis! Still find it hard to believe these two have never played in the finals.

Do you remember Dominick Hasek? He used to flail around like the fish at the end of the Faith No More "Epic" video but he seemed to get the job done. Not saying that Crawford is Hasek. I am just saying the results speak for themselves.
- faustus1500

I do remember Dominik Hasek, he was my favorite goalie growing up. It's why illogical conclusions like "the results speak for themselves" are so painful to hear as they draw out comparisons between the two, when in reality, there's very little to compare--it's why I made the comments about intent and awareness. Hasek had both and used them in the application of his unorthodox style. It's why he was great: He saw the game on a sort of fluid, micro-level scale at every step and reacted in turn. When he flopped, it wasn't because he was out of position or because he gave up a bad rebound (usually), it was because it was the only option available to him and he was somehow able to come to that conclusion and act. Performing like Hasek did (without any structure, essentially) takes a hockey IQ, vision of the game, what-have-you that is absolutely astounding, and he's about the only goalie that's been able to do it consistently in the history of the sport.

Crawford, on the other hand, looks lost in net most nights, even when his stat-line is decent. Rebound control wise, shots that most starting NHL goalies would absorb bounce off his chest and into the slot and he doesn't display very strong stick control, often leaving pucks loose at his feet instead of directing them to the corners. He also has a very odd tendency to align himself absolutely parallel to the goal line, and shows resistance in turning to face the shooter when they're coming down the wings or are along the boards, leaving himself out of position at times (latest example can be seen in Richards tip-in late in game 5--if he'd been in position, facing the shooter, that shot likely would've hit him.) When he gets in trouble, he doesn't exactly do what Hasek did (make a concerted, controlled effort to get the most area of his body as he can as close to the shooter as possible), but instead panics and just sort of dives obliviously towards the goal line. It's why you don't really see many highlight reel Crawford saves, just a ton of anxious D-Zone moments for Hawks fans where you wonder how the puck didn't go in the net *cough*Seabrook/Hjarm/strong team D awareness*cough*.

What the....? Correct me if I'm wrong, but Q has a cup with the Avs as an assistant.

Since then, as a head coach, he's been to 4 conference title games and won 2, has 1 cup with one undecided.

And you say he'll feel "shame" if he loses to a damn good Boston club? Yeah...ok.

If Q's coaching career continues at this pace I'm sure he'll be ashamed to accept entry into the Hockey Hall of Fame.

Dissent...you are a clown.

As for your assessment of Crawford?...How does the rubber nose and size 46 loafers feel.



Don't get me wrong, I'm a Blackhawk fan but have no clue how this series will end, and I'm not arrogant enough to guess.

As for you, step on in to the clown car, there's plenty of room for more 10' midgets such as yourself.
- ArlingtonRob

'Tis called hyperbole. I was pulling a Hrudey as described in the article, so I suppose your description is correct. As long as you know that you are what you eat in internet insults, sweetums.

I don't think any "REAL" Bruins fans are predicting a short series
- MrBeanTown

yep, this

2011-12 season: Sat Oct 15 2011 at Chi Boston 3, Chicago 2 (SO)


Yeah....the Bruins really destroyed the Hawks.....

Eklund summarized the all-time series between the two teams.
- faustus1500

Looked it up. March 29, 2011. The most lopsided game physically I had seen going back 50 years. Can't shake that. Hawks got destroyed in Boston.

We'll see but my initial reaction is...um, yes!

This Hawks team has quite a bit more depth than the two versions they fielded the years after winning the Cup.

Also, this team has shown throughout these playoffs that they can play a physical game. In addition to the usual customers Shaw, Bickell, and Seabs, I've seen all of these guys throwing pretty solid checks as well: Sharp, Frolik, Saad, Kruger, Handzus, Hossa, Bolland, Rozival, Oduya.

We were supposed to get pummeled by a big scary King team and it didn't happen. Game to game there wasn't a huge disparity in the hit dpet between teams either. Overrated stat I know but the point could also be made that the Hawks threw more or at least as many big hits through the course of the series.
- HawkintheD

Here's hoping you and JJ as well as others are right. Can't shake the memory of that game I referred to, and then I watch Chicago play less than a complete game and I wonder if that is going to work against Boston. I read JJ saying Boston needed a miracle to survive Toronto and he's absolutely correct. And you make all good points.

Looked it up. March 29, 2011. The most lopsided game physically I had seen going back 50 years. Can't shake that. Hawks got destroyed in Boston.
- 6628

Dude October is after March. The Hawks will be fine. The 2010-2011 team barely snuck into the playoffs.

I do remember Dominik Hasek, he was my favorite goalie growing up. It's why illogical conclusions like "the results speak for themselves" are so painful to hear as they draw out comparisons between the two, when in reality, there's very little to compare--it's why I made the comments about intent and awareness. Hasek had both and used them in the application of his unorthodox style. It's why he was great: He saw the game on a sort of fluid, micro-level scale at every step and reacted in turn. When he flopped, it wasn't because he was out of position or because he gave up a bad rebound (usually), it was because it was the only option available to him and he was somehow able to come to that conclusion and act. Performing like Hasek did (without any structure, essentially) takes a hockey IQ, vision of the game, what-have-you that is absolutely astounding, and he's about the only goalie that's been able to do it consistently in the history of the sport.

Crawford, on the other hand, looks lost in net most nights, even when his stat-line is decent. Rebound control wise, shots that most starting NHL goalies would absorb bounce off his chest and into the slot and he doesn't display very strong stick control, often leaving pucks loose at his feet instead of directing them to the corners. He also has a very odd tendency to align himself absolutely parallel to the goal line, and shows resistance in turning to face the shooter when they're coming down the wings or are along the boards, leaving himself out of position at times (latest example can be seen in Richards tip-in late in game 5--if he'd been in position, facing the shooter, that shot likely would've hit him.) When he gets in trouble, he doesn't exactly do what Hasek did (make a concerted, controlled effort to get the most area of his body as he can as close to the shooter as possible), but instead panics and just sort of dives obliviously towards the goal line. It's why you don't really see many highlight reel Crawford saves, just a ton of anxious D-Zone moments for Hawks fans where you wonder how the puck didn't go in the net *cough*Seabrook/Hjarm/strong team D awareness*cough*.
- Dissent

Hasek was one of the greatest of all time, but to say he didn't flail because he was always in positoon is absurd. He had amazing reflexes. If he was always in the best position, he wouldn't have to flail has much. Look, all I am saying is that both Crawford and Hasek didn't always look graceful. The results do matter. If Crawford was a bad or mediocre goalie, his save percentage would be worse. Do I think he is one of the best in the league? No, but he is more than capable to win a cup.

Hasek was one of the greatest of all time, but to say he didn't flail because he was always in positoon is absurd. He had amazing reflexes. If he was always in the best position, he wouldn't have to flail has much. Look, all I am saying is that both Crawford and Hasek didn't always look graceful. The results do matter. If Crawford was a bad or mediocre goalie, his save percentage would be worse. Do I think he is one of the best in the league? No, but he is more than capable to win a cup.
- faustus1500

What I'm saying is that Hasek flailing WAS Hasek being in position. It was often (note the qualifying statement) done in response to a broken play outside of his control, not in response to a play he created through bad rebounds and positioning, and then done in panic, ala Crawford. Even when responding with a "flop," Hasek was under control in that he still knew where the puck was and reacted accordingly. When Crawford flops, he generally looks like he doesn't know where the puck is, and isn't actually reacting to the shooter, but is just trying to fill the net--ie. he just tries to get back into the net. The difference to the casual observer may be moot, and you can claim that all that matters is the results, but I'm pretty sure the difference is going to be pretty severe when you have a team like the Bruins pressuring the net w/ shots and crashing the crease w/ a greater presence than the other teams you've faced in the playoffs thus far.