Controlled Chaos

QUOTE (Nokona @ Apr 22, 2011 -> 02:09 AM) I happened to miss what made Bolly get the game misconduct. What caused him to get so angry? He only got a unsportsmanlike conduct for whacking his stick on the boards and yelling at the ref. 2 min. He was understandably pissed. Here was the hit Hamuis hit to his head. He was kind of pushing his head into the glass with is arm. If you want to see the video, it's at the 1:31 mark. This game easily could have been 9-0 if not for some great stops by luongo and schneider. Sharp 2 breakaways. Toews I think had a couple. And the Hawks laid back offensively in the 3rd. If I'm upset about anything it's that...this was the game where Scott could've dished out some payback and he didn't. Still an uphill battle, but this is the series I was hoping for when I thought Bolland would be back. Obviously, I didn't expect this offensive onslaught, but I expected better games on both sides. I have no doubt if Bolly was back for any of the 1st three, the Hawks would have won at least one of them. Anyway, Canucks have a couple of days to let it fester...They'll be ready Sunday, but if the Hawks can deliver the first blow, it's on!

Everyone is playing well. Scott is serving a purpose, but for the love of god he needs to just give the puck up when he gets it.

Need to be relentless.

My favorite Chicago sports writer. Canucks prove gutless against Hawks By BARRY ROZNER The Vancouver Canucks have long been known as a team that will crack under the strain, succumb to the pressure and ultimately choke away a chance to win the Stanley Cup. But now they’ve shown the entire NHL they’re gutless, too. Raffi Torres tops the list and Kevin Bieksa isn’t far behind. They’re both fairly typical of the “new” NHL, which has created an environment where players aren’t held accountable. The players used to police these matters and settle scores — think Darren McCarty-Claude Lemieux and Dirk Graham-Vlad Konstantinov — and the game was safer because of it, but now the league would rather have Torres running around trying to end careers and never force him to answer for it. John Scott had every intention of putting Torres in his place Tuesday night late in the game, but as he engaged Torres at the faceoff circle, referee Dan O’Rourke tossed them both, robbing the Hawks of a chance to set things straight. That’s maddening enough — and you wonder why Scott didn’t wait until the puck dropped — but then Bieksa suddenly became a tough guy with Scott gone for the night. He jumped legendary enforcer Viktor Stalberg and began throwing punches before Stalberg even knew he was in a fight. Wow, Bieksa is some brave man. Does he kick kittens, too? About 10 minutes earlier, Tanner Glass refused to fight Scott, and when he couldn’t get Glass involved, Scott waited too long to have a conversation with Bieksa, who feigned hearing loss and wouldn’t even look at Scott — the equivalent of going into the turtle. Why does the phrase, “Hiding behind your mom’s skirt,” come to mind? Meanwhile, how did referee Brad Meier fail to call the instigator on Bieksa? He pretended not to see it because it carries a one-game suspension when it occurs in the final five minutes. Nice job, fellas. And then there’s Vancouver coach Alain Vigneault, who’s as weak as his players and encourages this spineless behavior. You think of a guy like Ducks coach Randy Carlyle, who had James Wisniewski on the ice at the end of a game against the Hawks in March 2010 to answer for an earlier hit on Brent Seabrook. Wisniewski knew what was coming and got the better of Nick Boynton, but that wasn’t the point. Carlyle didn’t want carry-over so he didn’t protect Wisniewski or hide him on the bench. That’s the NHL Carlyle knows, but in Gary Bettman’s NHL, Torres gets no suspension, Scott gets tossed and Vigneault has Bieksa on the ice to go after an unsuspecting Stalberg. You can see where the Canucks get their guts. Hopefully, this series goes long enough for the Hawks to make it right. If not, they better have long memories. Bobby Lu Speaking of weak, the mentally fragile Roberto Luongo could have pulled himself at the end of the second period down 4, or even after the first goal of the third that put his team behind 6-1. Instead, he waited until a scrum broke out 200 feet away and slithered off to cower on the bench while the UC crowd had its attention focused on other matters. This is one strong group of men. Case for defense Brian Campbell leads the team in giveaways, is last in hits and was the worst Hawk for three games. And while his poor defense is never a surprise — like on the Canucks’ first goal Tuesday — an offensive defenseman is supposed to shoot the puck and he was passing up far too many good looks through three games. It drives the Hawks’ coaching staff nuts when the defense is unable or unwilling to get pucks to the net, but that’s something they finally did in Game 4. After getting 1 point with 4 shots and a minus-4 through three games, Campbell had a goal, a post, 3 shots and a plus-4 in Game 4. No one expects him to play defense, but Campbell can help in a huge way offensively when he gets pucks to the net and joins the play the way he did Tuesday.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Apr 20, 2011 -> 05:11 PM) One of the best ones, proving this guy knows nothing, is this: 3) You're up 6 - 1, and you're still using your top PP? If I remember correctly, in a blow-out game earlier this season, Quenneville was bad-mouthing the other team for still using their top PP unit (was it against the Canucks?). Why would you contradict yourself? Again, show some class, and let your other players - you know, the one's you've barely played, or did you forget about them? - have some PP time. Well mr. hockey, we put our top guys out there because you were running around like a bunch of ass clowns, so we wanted to tack on another one for good measure. The penalty in reference was the Edler charging call. Usually, yes, you call off the dogs. But Canucks being idiots? Let's go score again. Not to mention the only thing that he could possible be talking about here is when Vigneault, the coach of his team, complained that the Hawks were running up the score when they were winning 6-0 earlier this year. How comical is it when you're trying to take a dig at the opposing coach, but you're really talking about your own team whining about getting their ass kicked.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Apr 20, 2011 -> 01:12 PM) While we can mock Canucks (or other) fans all we want, and we should...the whole "this series is about USA vs Canada" is so meatball I can't even stand it. I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure before game 3 when Honda was announcing please rise for the Canadian anthem, people were booing. I've also been at games and heard "canada sucks" and "usa, usa, usa" chants from some idiots. Show some respect. More than that, the majority of players on the Hawks (and every team) are CANADIAN. Note, I'm not saying anyone implied that in this thread, I've just seen it and heard it around. Wow haven't really heard that anywhere...but I agree it's totally lame. Not only are the majority of players Canadian, the majority of refs are. There are 20 refs for this years playoffs and 15 are Canadian. Are they conspiring against their own country?? I was googling to see which refs were Canadian and come across a ton of whiny articles, comments, and posts about NHL refs being against Canadian teams. The Canadian teams always get the worst DAMN refs Why do you think Bettman won't let another team go to another Canadian city? Is it my imagination or are the NHL refs favoring the U.S. teams when they play Canadian teams? Stop NHL Ref's from Screwing Canadian Teams is on Facebook Why NHL refs are even lamer than the Canadian senate? Should bettman go? and why does he hate Canada? See how much the refs can screw a Canadian team in the playoffs

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Apr 20, 2011 -> 11:12 AM) Worst fans in hockey. You would think an expansion team with no Cup wins would be a little less irritating. And BTW, the Hawks didnt actually beat them last night, the refs did. The refs missed almost 50 calls against the Hawks in case you were wondering. http://forum.canucks.com/forum/24-canucks-talk/ For my own sanity, I have to believe a lot of the stuff is kids. Hockey is their world....there are no other sports. As soon as a kid is old enough to say my dad is tougher than your dad....they are online talking about how their team is the bestest....yada yada yada. If the majority of these delusional posters are adults...the world is in trouble.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 20, 2011 -> 08:51 AM) (caption this photo) What's even funnier is the comments under this picture. "Brave guy, with the glass between them, lets see if he has the guts to say it to the goalie's face, I doubt that, its the act of a coward." "Hey Vimce, that picture alone will give the Roberto all he needs to kick Chicago @#$" http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_dadd...?urn=nhl-wp3006

QUOTE (chimpy2121 @ Apr 19, 2011 -> 10:01 PM) Can't f***ing stand the Canucks and their fans. How funny that Bieksa takes on Stalberg once Scott is out of the game. Also, how the hell is that not an instigator penalty? Win game 5 and Luongo might shart himself having to play under pressure back at the UC. That's what I was saying...as soon as Scott is out...all of a sudden Vancouver gets chippy. It sucks because if Seabrook is back for game 5, I'd like to play without Scott, but I don't think they can afford to do it. Great effort last night!

Bolland baby!! Needed this dude. What a difference.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Apr 19, 2011 -> 01:12 PM) However, that wasn't a lateral or blind side hit. They didn't exactly need the loop hole, and that type of hit isn't the reason rule 48 was implemented. Under the current rules, not all head shots are illegal. If you want to make the argument that you should change the rules, fine. But as your 2nd article stated, the correct ruling was made based upon the rules. That's not a match penalty. Again, if the puck was there, it was a legal hit. You are going to give him a match penalty for a legal hit? I also don't agree that he targeted the head and that was it. You've got two guys skating in on an angle, he goes for the hit, and Seabrook's route/body position exposed his head at the time of the hit. They weren't skating in a straight line at each other, allowing Torres to sit there and line that up. If Torres wanted to hurt him, he would have done something much worse. Torres stopped his skating stride and glided on the route he was on and hit him with his shoulder. Good play if Seabrook had touched the puck, interference since it wasn't. That is what I'm doing. I'm talking about if the NHL wants to be serious about protecting players from concussions or major injury then that type of hit, without a doubt, should be included. We'll agree to disagree on the targeting head thing. I have watched that video over and over pausing it at different times and there is no way I can be slightly swayed that he wasn't directly targeting his head. He had plenty of time and space to totally level Seabrook with a hard clean hit...instead he avoided the body and went for the head. I don't know how you can see it any different or what he could have done worse. It is a dirty, totally unnecessary play. It would have been just as vicious and clean if he plowed into his body and ran him over, minus the chance for a broken neck. This has nothing to do with him being a Blackhawk....it has to do with what hockey. What about that hit is a hockey play? I love a good hit when a guy has his head down...run his ass over...I just think drilling him in the head is more about trying to injury a guy then flattening him.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Apr 19, 2011 -> 12:05 PM) At the very least it should have been a match penalty for interference. You simply can not allow that kind of play. Granted, Seabrook should have had his head up, you are taught that from an early age. And yes, if he had the puck it's just a devastating but legal play. I agree that he didn't leave his feet, or lead with an elbow and he stopped his stride so it was not charging. But, those are not pre-requisites for a suspendable play. Especially since Torres isn't exactly known for clean play, it's not like you can say oh this was a one time thing. No, this is a player that needs to be toned down a bit. A couple of great reads on it. http://www.windsorstar.com/sports/playing+...9607/story.html http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2011/04/19/ker...-get-serious-2/ The only thing he didn't violate in Rule 48 is some hidden addendum that says you can hit a guy in the head behind the net. If you find that rule here, please let me know. Either way it's a ridiculous exception. If that hit occurs 4 feet to the left or right from where it occurred, then Rule 48 can be enforced?? There's also Rule 21.1 Match Penalty - A match penalty involves the suspension of a player for the balance of the game and the offender shall be ordered to the dressing room immediately. A match penalty shall be imposed on any player who deliberately attempts to injure or who deliberately injures an opponent in any manner. He could have blasted him with a legal hit and chose to not blast him, but cut him off so he can just hit his head. That is clear to anyone that watches that play.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Apr 18, 2011 -> 03:09 PM) I know I'm probably in the minority because the hit happened to a Hawk, but looking at this unbiasedly I don't think it warranted a suspension. Interference? It certainly was, as Seabrook never touched the puck. But it was not an elbow at all, he didn't leave his feet, it wasn't from behind/side, and I don't believe he was targeting his head.(what?) He never went for the puck, which is troublesome, but if Seabrook did touch the puck it would have been a hard, but legal, hit. There is also more latitude given behind the net on hits than in other areas (NHL words, not mine). Just because a play "looks bad" live doesn't make it a suspension. Let me add that Seabrook put himself in an awful position on the play and needs to take some responsibility to have his head up/have more awareness, especially behind the net. That contributed to the intensity of the hit. I think the best look is here. I think someone can be unbiased even though it happened to their team. The intent to injure is there and that's all that matters. If the NHL want's to get serious here and I love I big hit as much as the next guy, but this is the s*** that needs to stop. I don't care if it's a shoulder or an elbow...if your intention is to come up right under someone's chin..you're out to injure. He's crouched down so he can explode upward. Watch this in full screen and pause it at 1:13. He is going right at Seabrooks head. He could have laid a devastating hit on Seabrook and knocked him back probably 2 feet on his ass, but instead he chose to squeeze in that space between seabs' head and the glass so he can hit his head. If you pause it at 1:15 you can see it is literally shoulder to chin. He doesn't even hit him with any other part of his body. He had him lined up so it wasn't a "speed of the game thing" he went in to knock his head off. I agree Seabs put himself in a bad spot and probably knew he was going to pay the price, but nobody should have to pay like that. This bulls*** where the injury determines the punishment is ludicrous as well. If #7 lays on the ice and gets taken off on a stretcher with a broken neck...Torres is suspended. It was as dirty a play as you get and considering Torres has pretty much been trying to injure players his entire career should factor in.

Just had a little too much to overcome this year. I'm disappointed, but content with the result. The roster overhaul that was needed, really shook up a team that had gelled so well, yet they still had a solid season. I was pretty optimistic Bolland was going to be back for the start of this series or at least game 2. Then they lose Kopecky. I think this would have been a better series if those guys were in the lineup. Vancouver's defense is playing awesome though and Luongo has stood up to the challenge. I think the future is definitely bright. This is a young team and the Hawks have been playing playoff like hockey for the last few weeks now. That combined with this first round has given guys like Kruger, Frolik, Stalberg, Smith, Leddy and Crawford some valuable experience. No doubt this was a new level of intensity for them. Even Campoli only had 11 playoff games under his belt. I think the Hawks will resign him as he should stay right around the same price. Man, every time I look at capgeek, I get agita seeing Campbells contract!! I get the Hawks needed to make a big splash to get some asses in the seats and capitalize on Toews and Kane. The old man just died and they dished out for Huet and Campbell to create a buzz, but uggh every time I see his name with $7,142,875 next to it for the next 5 years I get ill. In the system I think we'll see solid contributions from Makarov, Morin, Pirri and if he ever stops acting like a 12 yr old punk, Beach.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Apr 17, 2011 -> 05:00 PM) You guys are ridiculous for trying to excuse the actions of Kane and chalking it up to "being young." Kane is the exception, not the rule. The rest of the young NHL isn't drunk and in trouble all the time. Bet people said the same s*** about Theo Fleury. He's drunk and in trouble all the time? I know he's been wasted on occasion and he has been shown at a lot of bars partying, but with the exception of 1 incident, he's been fine. When I was 22, I took off Mon & Wed and that's it. Had a good time and was able to function fine the next day. Now not so much, but now I may go out once a month. Kane is fine.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Apr 17, 2011 -> 11:15 AM) See Toews, Jonathan Well if captain serious is where you set the bar then yeah I guess most 22 yr olds are d-bags. Anyway....must win tonight. Lets go Hawks!!

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Apr 17, 2011 -> 10:59 AM) Yeah... that was just weird. Why, he called him a d-bag off the ice...JoeCool just changed it to 22 yr old. I agree...Kane is just young having fun. He isn't a bad kid. The dude is IMO the best offensive player on this team. Game in and game out he creates more scoring chances than anyone on the team. He could easily have 15 more assists this year if some players could just bang home the gifts he creates. It's like playing with Stockton or Kidd. They find a way to get you a scoring opportunity that you're not ready for because you don't have the same vision...hence you lose the ball/puck & miss the shot. He is truly unique. He could shoot more, but more often than not, he is drawing 2 guys to him and passing is the best move. He is the guy that creates the play...not the guy that just waits for the pass to bang it home. He needs to be better on defense, but his back checking is vastly improved as is his ability to steal the puck.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Apr 16, 2011 -> 09:45 AM) I really wonder if Kane is a scapegoat in all of this and moved for salary reasons. This would be a HUGE mistake and it ain't gonna happen. Kane is the real deal and is only going to get better.

QUOTE (SexiAlexei @ Apr 15, 2011 -> 01:31 PM) The trump tower or the IBM building? Edit: Trump tower? 5 star hotel? Or i'm an idiot. Well done.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Apr 15, 2011 -> 10:34 AM) Sounds like Kopecky got hurt and is out for game 2. I assume Pisani will take his place, although the old-time hockey fans will all be clamoring for John Scott cause the team needs to get tougher. Lets get it done tonight!!!

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Apr 14, 2011 -> 10:28 AM) Kind of the status quo for much of the season. I don't know if he got worn out last season or what, but he's definitely looked nothing like a Norris Trophy winner. Yeah...not sure what happened to the guy. He's too dam casual with the puck, he gets outworked on the boards and his passes are off the mark more than they're on.

It wasn't pretty watching the Hawks not only get hit, but also play like they're afraid to get hit. However, they took it and were the better team in the next 2 periods. Dam if Campbell just puts the puck in the net on that sweet feed from Kane with a minute left in the first, it could have been a different game. A lot of bounces went against the Hawks last night, so hopefully fortunes turn Friday. Crawford looked up to the task. I thought Campbell had a terrible first period and was directly responsible for a goal on that stupid backwards pass and a missed goal. It was also his guy that scored on that tip goal, but I can't totally fault himfor that.

Hawks outplaying em here in the second. Need a bounce for christ sake. Luongo'ss been good, but if Campbell lifts the puck 6 inches instead of slideing it on the ice...the Hawks are right in this. Also, what's with Vancouver leaving their feet for like every check.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Apr 13, 2011 -> 12:40 PM) Canucks fans are literally the worst. Last playoffs they referred to the Hawks as thugs who just bullied their way to the Cup, and now they are already b****ing about refereeing that hasnt happened yet. Enjoy your first presidents trophy you expansion team f*** heads. There's already a NHL conspiracy against them because it's in the best interest of the league for a US team to win. "The business plan of the NHL has always been about gaining revenue from a national USA TV contract. Take that out of the fiscal equation and many USA franchises just don't add up. The NHL cannot exist as it is presently formatted if it becomes a gate driven enterprise! If you accept this premise then consider the 2011 playoffs. The #1 team in the NHL is the Vancouver Canucks. A deep run into the playoffs and heaven bid a CUP win by the Canucks is definitely not a good thing for the league. Let alone the time difference which takes the East coast out of viewership.... IMO the Canucks will have to outplay their competiton by a sizeable margin to gain Stanley. THe hockey establishment will be working against them on and off the ice. Review the '82 and '94 runs to refresh your awareness levels Canuck fans. Roger put the towel on that stick for a reason! Replay the Game 7 at New York in '94 and watch the reffing in that game." Also, the Hossa goal allowed in the St Louis game is proof the league is behind Chicago.