Truth hurts doesn't it? About a month ago the Hawks couldn't even decide who the #1 goalie was...Crawford? Emery? Crawford? Emery? Doesn't even matter. Canucks played bad and still won.
- CanUSA17

You do know the splits with Luongo 33 starts and Scneider 17 starts are closer then Crawford 36 starts and Emery 15 starts

So I dont quite understand what you are talking about. Emery has played a "Back up" role thus far.

[quote=Walky]Seeing many posts about Hawks being outhit. Being outhit is ok. More important is that people are finishing checks. The Hawks aren't the Bruins and aren't going to run people out of the building. They aren't built that way. Now at 2:1, thats a bit concerning, but doesn't VAN have a reputation of inflating their hit totals at home?/quote]



No, the Canucks don't usually outhit teams and the hits aren't inflated. Edler was all over the Hawks tonight.
- rdfred

do you like the physical play of your d when the other player has his back turned>

me i call it chicken $hit

You do know the splits with Luongo 33 starts and Scneider 17 starts are closer the Crawford 36 starts and Emery 15 starts

So I dont quite understand what you are talking about. Emery has played a "Back up" role thus far.
- mvp0207

Tough to win an argument with a 12 year old retard, I wouldn't bother wasting your keystrokes.

And to think I was pulling for the 'Nucks back in '94 against the Rangers. Times sure have changed.

Although Vancouver is still a beautiful city.

What truth? That you won a regular season game in January? Who cares.
- golfbard

No the truth that your Hawks will go nowhere in the playoffs. Look at the team man...I'm sure you watch the games...they are too small, not physical enough to succeed in the playoffs and your goaltending is a question mark. Your defenseman will be burned out before the playoffs even start. Your teams biggest mistake was letting Buff and Ladd go. Your team needs to add some big pieces at the deadline and even that may not be enough.

And to think I was pulling for the 'Nucks back in '94 against the Rangers. Times sure have changed.

Although Vancouver is still a beautiful city.
- ArlingtonRob

especially when the nuck fans light it on fire

do you like the physical play of your d when the other player has his back turned>

me i call it chicken $hit
- molly2522

What game were you at (or watching)? Be specific now. Every hit of Edler's was a solid straight up hit. The only hit from behind was by a Hawks player on Kesler. You're either delusional or just making up stuff to sound like you might actually know something. C'mon list the hits from behind by the Canucks. Still waiting....

do you like the physical play of your d when the other player has his back turned>

me i call it chicken $hit
- molly2522

If you thought that was a dirty game you should be watching tennis then. It was fast paced with no huge hits . Two penalties the whole night . Man get a grip .It was a pretty even game .Like someone said it is a game in January who cares.

No the truth that your Hawks will go nowhere in the playoffs. Look at the team man...I'm sure you watch the games...they are too small, not physical enough to succeed in the playoffs and your goaltending is a question mark. Your defenseman will be burned out before the playoffs even start. Your teams biggest mistake was letting Buff and Ladd go. Your team needs to add some big pieces at the deadline and even that may not be enough.
- CanUSA17

Tough to win an argument with a 12 year old retard, I wouldn't bother wasting your keystrokes.
- Ogilthorpe2

He's not arguing with you.

Because our most skilled forward needs to pick his head out of his ass and quit pouting because he hasn't scored a goal. Kane let Sedin walk right to the front of the net. That was his guy.
- tokked

No it wasnt but OK if thats what you want to believe. Last time Ill say it 4 on 4 = man on man hockey. Keith and Seabs should have been on the Sedin sisters.

If that was Kanes man then who should Seabrook and keith been covering? One of The Nucks Point men? Of course not.

One of them either Keith or Seabs should have pressured the puck and the other should have covered the front of the net. Now if one of the point men bit and Kane or Bolland was late covering him in the slot THEN it would have been their fault but KANE WAS ON HIS MAN at the point and Bolland tryed to help. PERIOD thats the way it was. Those who seen things otherwise are simply incorrect.

No the truth that your Hawks will go nowhere in the playoffs. Look at the team man...I'm sure you watch the games...they are too small, not physical enough to succeed in the playoffs and your goaltending is a question mark. Your defenseman will be burned out before the playoffs even start. Your teams biggest mistake was letting Buff and Ladd go. Your team needs to add some big pieces at the deadline and even that may not be enough.
- CanUSA17

what does it say when we outplayed you most of the game
watch out if the hawks get a few more pieces

There should not have to be rotations or philosophies on 4 on 4. Its man on man. Now could Kane, Like Bolland have noticed a mishap and came off his man to help and leave the two point men wide open. Yes maybe but that would have been above and beyond his job.
- mvp0207

You really don't have a clue about defensive zone coverage. Watch the replay. Keith is covering the Henrik down low. Kane is covering Daniel on the wall. The puck goes down low to Henrik and Kane just watches. Daniel was Kane's guy at the start of the play and he should have staid with him.

If you thought that was a dirty game you should be watching tennis then. It was fast paced with no huge hits . Two penalties the whole night . Man get a grip .It was a pretty even game .Like someone said it is a game in January who cares.
- VANTEL

i dont think its dirty just not the style of play i like

No the truth that your Hawks will go nowhere in the playoffs. Look at the team man...I'm sure you watch the games...they are too small, not physical enough to succeed in the playoffs and your goaltending is a question mark. Your defenseman will be burned out before the playoffs even start. Your teams biggest mistake was letting Buff and Ladd go. Your team needs to add some big pieces at the deadline and even that may not be enough.
- CanUSA17

You never know until you play the games. And dont the two teams have about the same amount of points this year. There is more then one way to skin a cat. Lets just see what moves they make and how things come together.

Vancouver has not proved to be much of a play-off team either. So are you writing them off also?

especially when the nuck fans light it on fire
- molly2522

I was trying to NOT go there, but if you insist.

You do know the splits with Luongo 33 starts and Scneider 17 starts are closer the Crawford 36 starts and Emery 15 starts

So I dont quite understand what you are talking about. Emery has played a "Back up" role thus far.
- mvp0207

If you think Crawford will lead you through the playoffs you are sadly mistaken. Even the bandwagon Hawk fans I talk to can see this. Ogilthorpe just doesn't like to hear the truth so he resorts to name calling. It's okay I understand you're frustration.

No it wasnt but OK if thats what you want to believe. Last time Ill say it 4 on 4 = man on man hockey. Keith and Seabs should have been on the Sedin sisters.

If that was Kanes man then who should Seabrook and keith been covering? One of The Nucks Point men? Of course not.

One of them either Keith or Seabs should have pressured the puck and the other should have covered the front of the net. Now if one of the point men bit and Kane or Bolland was late covering him in the slot THEN it would have been their fault but KANE WAS ON HIS MAN at the point and Bolland tryed to help. PERIOD thats the way it was. Those who seen things otherwise are simply incorrect.
- mvp0207

You really need to quit repeating the man on man thing. If Hendrik decide to skate out to the point then I guess Seabs or Kieth should just follow him to the point. That is not how coverage works. You rotate your responsibilities so you are not chasing guys around the ice.

You really don't have a clue about defensive zone coverage. Watch the replay. Keith is covering the Henrik down low. Kane is covering Daniel on the wall. The puck goes down low to Henrik and Kane just watches. Daniel was Kane's guy at the start of the play and he should have staid with him.
- tokked

Im still not sure on this. Based on how the D didn't move, it seems the hawks were playing more of a zone than a man. Which would mean Keith can make a choice between going down low or hanging back. He chose to hang back so doesn't that make the scoring Sedin his man? He was standing next to him when he scored. It makes no sense to have a forward defending a forward in man in 4on4 in your own zone.

i dont think its dirty just not the style of play i like
- molly2522

Dude there were no dirty hits in the game no intents to injure . No Cheap shots.The refs were fine.

You really don't have a clue about defensive zone coverage. Watch the replay. Keith is covering the Henrik down low. Kane is covering Daniel on the wall. The puck goes down low to Henrik and Kane just watches. Daniel was Kane's guy at the start of the play and he should have staid with him.
- tokked

Well we will agree to disagree. But I truly believe you are wrong. 5 on 5 maybe a different story with rotations and zone coverage but 4 on 4 is man on man and Im done with this argument I've commented on it enough.

Can anyone else on this thread comment on the fact that 4 on 4 the defense covers the forwards and vice versa?

Im still not sure on this. Based on how the D didn't move, it seems the hawks were playing more of a zone than a man. Which would mean Keith can make a choice between going down low or hanging back. He chose to hang back so doesn't that make the scoring Sedin his man? He was standing next to him when he scored. It makes no sense to have a forward defending a forward in man in 4on4 in your own zone.
- Walky

Its preached consistently by any coach. 4 on 4 you are responsible for YOUR man one for one and each Defender has a forward and vice versa.

Now if someone screws up its up to your teammate to pick you up and thats what Bolland was trying to do he almost made a nice play and got to Danials stick. But the Defense should have had the forwards. Im positive on this

He's not arguing with you.
- rdfred

I guess you missed the 3 times he's called me tool today.

And to think I was pulling for the 'Nucks back in '94 against the Rangers. Times sure have changed.

Although Vancouver is still a beautiful city.
- ArlingtonRob

Yeah I was as well. I loved those jerseys and the pacific coliseum. Bure and captain Kirk. I was happy for larmer though.

what does it say when we outplayed you most of the game
watch out if the hawks get a few more pieces
- molly2522

I just said the Canucks played like crap. They were sloppy all game and too much standing around in the defensive zone. Believe me they can play much better than they showed tonight.