08-09' Blackhawks (46-24-12) 104 PTS - 4th Seed In The West!

[UMFan83]

Also, I hate the fact that a SO Winner gets 2 points and a SO Loser gets 1. I'm not suggesting the SO becomes all or nothing, because we all know how stupid that would be.

 

Can't we just go back to ties? It's the only sports I perfectly accept ties in, and they don't have them anymore.

[kujay]

Not knowing much about statistical norms in hockey (you know like how a .300 hitter is considered good in baseball). Is that goaltender with a Russian last name that I can't spell, playing well this year. Based on what I've watched this year he seems like it but I have no idea how to judge a goalie.

 

Khabibulin is 13th in GAA (2.33) and 10th in SP (.924). I wouldn't say he is "standing on his head," but he's playing so much better than Huet (2.95 GAA and .900 SP).

[Soul]

Shootouts probably create excitement for the casual fan (At least they do for me when I watch soccer), that and it got rid of ties, another thing that the casual fan doesn't like. Thus, they will probably stay. The problem that most people who watch hockey have with them is that they are an unfair way to determine a winner. I think most of the excitement from a shootout win is more from relief that it is from excitement. Although, back in the day OT would have ended and your team would have one point. With the shootout, the opportunity for the extra point exists.

 

Wow, couldn't have said it better myself.

 

I don't really care what system they have ultimately, but I do distinctly remember the ties generating as many complaints as the SOs do now. I don't really see a solution that will please everyone. There will likely always be complaints.

[bcl412]

Also, I hate the fact that a SO Winner gets 2 points and a SO Loser gets 1. I'm not suggesting the SO becomes all or nothing, because we all know how stupid that would be.

 

Can't we just go back to ties? It's the only sports I perfectly accept ties in, and they don't have them anymore.

 

If shootouts are going to exists, I think that if you lose in OT you get zero points. If it gets to the SO than each team gets a point, like it's a tie and then the SO is for the extra point. This might give more incentive to try to win in OT (not saying teams stall to get to the SO, but I would assume it happens).

[jersey cubs fan]

Also, I hate the fact that a SO Winner gets 2 points and a SO Loser gets 1. I'm not suggesting the SO becomes all or nothing, because we all know how stupid that would be.

 

Can't we just go back to ties? It's the only sports I perfectly accept ties in, and they don't have them anymore.

 

If shootouts are going to exists, I think that if you lose in OT you get zero points. If it gets to the SO than each team gets a point, like it's a tie and then the SO is for the extra point. This might give more incentive to try to win in OT (not saying teams stall to get to the SO, but I would assume it happens).

 

Part of the reason they gave a point for reaching OT was because of the concern that teams would play far too conservatively in OT so they don't risk out on getting that one point.

[kujay]

Also, I hate the fact that a SO Winner gets 2 points and a SO Loser gets 1. I'm not suggesting the SO becomes all or nothing, because we all know how stupid that would be.

 

Can't we just go back to ties? It's the only sports I perfectly accept ties in, and they don't have them anymore.

 

If shootouts are going to exists, I think that if you lose in OT you get zero points. If it gets to the SO than each team gets a point, like it's a tie and then the SO is for the extra point. This might give more incentive to try to win in OT (not saying teams stall to get to the SO, but I would assume it happens).

 

No, I think it would do the opposite. If you got zero points for losing in OT, everyone would hang back and not take any chances because they would just try to get into the SO to make sure they got that point. That's actually why they set it up the way they did, to try to get teams to take chances and make the OT exciting. Same reason it's 4-on-4.

[UMFan83]

Also, I hate the fact that a SO Winner gets 2 points and a SO Loser gets 1. I'm not suggesting the SO becomes all or nothing, because we all know how stupid that would be.

 

Can't we just go back to ties? It's the only sports I perfectly accept ties in, and they don't have them anymore.

 

If shootouts are going to exists, I think that if you lose in OT you get zero points. If it gets to the SO than each team gets a point, like it's a tie and then the SO is for the extra point. This might give more incentive to try to win in OT (not saying teams stall to get to the SO, but I would assume it happens).

 

No, I think it would do the opposite. If you got zero points for losing in OT, everyone would hang back and not take any chances because they would just try to get into the SO to make sure they got that point. That's actually why they set it up the way they did, to try to get teams to take chances and make the OT exciting. Same reason it's 4-on-4.

 

Basically since there is arguements both ways about teams slacking off to get that 1 point, I think thats case enough that the OT/SO system is flawed. 2 points for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a loss. Just do it.

[jersey cubs fan]

Also, I hate the fact that a SO Winner gets 2 points and a SO Loser gets 1. I'm not suggesting the SO becomes all or nothing, because we all know how stupid that would be.

 

Can't we just go back to ties? It's the only sports I perfectly accept ties in, and they don't have them anymore.

 

If shootouts are going to exists, I think that if you lose in OT you get zero points. If it gets to the SO than each team gets a point, like it's a tie and then the SO is for the extra point. This might give more incentive to try to win in OT (not saying teams stall to get to the SO, but I would assume it happens).

 

No, I think it would do the opposite. If you got zero points for losing in OT, everyone would hang back and not take any chances because they would just try to get into the SO to make sure they got that point. That's actually why they set it up the way they did, to try to get teams to take chances and make the OT exciting. Same reason it's 4-on-4.

 

Basically since there is arguements both ways about teams slacking off to get that 1 point, I think thats case enough that the OT/SO system is flawed. 2 points for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a loss. Just do it.

 

Except that goes back to the problem people mentioned where nobody is going to risk losing in OT, and losing that point.

[UMFan83]

Also, I hate the fact that a SO Winner gets 2 points and a SO Loser gets 1. I'm not suggesting the SO becomes all or nothing, because we all know how stupid that would be.

 

Can't we just go back to ties? It's the only sports I perfectly accept ties in, and they don't have them anymore.

 

If shootouts are going to exists, I think that if you lose in OT you get zero points. If it gets to the SO than each team gets a point, like it's a tie and then the SO is for the extra point. This might give more incentive to try to win in OT (not saying teams stall to get to the SO, but I would assume it happens).

 

No, I think it would do the opposite. If you got zero points for losing in OT, everyone would hang back and not take any chances because they would just try to get into the SO to make sure they got that point. That's actually why they set it up the way they did, to try to get teams to take chances and make the OT exciting. Same reason it's 4-on-4.

 

Basically since there is arguements both ways about teams slacking off to get that 1 point, I think thats case enough that the OT/SO system is flawed. 2 points for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a loss. Just do it.

 

Except that goes back to the problem people mentioned where nobody is going to risk losing in OT, and losing that point.

 

OK, then cancel hockey.

[bcl412]

You could go old school and have no OT. Just award teams with ties.

 

I suppose someone's going to bitch no matter what.

[bukie]

Wins and losses are irrelevant. Teams should be awarded points for scoring goals and subtracted points for allowing goals.

[YearofDaCubs]

I think it's pretty clear right now that Huet shouldn't play until the second game of the back-to-back next weekend. I doubt he'll sit that long, but he should.

 

The OT was a mess. Really, from the 5:00 mark of the 3rd I was just sort of holding my breath and hoping that the Hawks would be able to hold on and get a point. They didn't look particularly coordinated at all. Very choppy, had trouble putting passes together.

 

But they got the win. Win tomorrow night and we can start dreaming of having a great trip!

Huet is garbage. One of the dumbest FA pickups by Talon. Huet did nothing to do deserve a contract like that.

 

I agree he is overpaid... but he is not garbage at all. He thrives on getting multiple starts in a row like he did last year. His numbers were really good last year, hence the large contract.

Contract year syndrome. Plays good to get a fat contract and then doesn't do squat.

[UMFan83]

You could go old school and have no OT. Just award teams with ties.

 

I suppose someone's going to bitch no matter what.

 

But then teams are going to be conservative the last 5 minutes of the 3rd period, etc etc etc

[kujay]

You could go old school and have no OT. Just award teams with ties.

 

I suppose someone's going to bitch no matter what.

 

But then teams are going to be conservative the last 5 minutes of the 3rd period, etc etc etc

 

Right.

 

There is no perfect solution. So the question is how to balance the integrity of the game with the interests of the fans. I think they have struck that balance now, though I agree with the suggestion that perhaps the shootout be extended to include five shooters like the AHL does.

 

It's a great game and I'm glad to be excited about it again, even if it's not perfect. It's been awhile since I've looked forward to the next time the Hawks play. Tomorrow night, 7:30, btw. :)

[Flames24Rulz]

Make OT longer than 5 minutes. Heck, make it even 20 minutes and just have OT be sudden-death. If it's still tied after 20 minutes, then have a shootout to settle the score. I just think that the 5 minute overtime is too short as it is right now. A good percentage of games that go OT go to the shootout because there really isn't enough time in OT to get many scoring chances.

[UMFan83]

Make OT longer than 5 minutes. Heck, make it even 20 minutes and just have OT be sudden-death. If it's still tied after 20 minutes, then have a shootout to settle the score. I just think that the 5 minute overtime is too short as it is right now. A good percentage of games that go OT go to the shootout because there really isn't enough time in OT to get many scoring chances.

 

That's a valid point as well. I disagree with having a SO after though. Play 20 minutes of OT and if they are still tied, then they deserve to tie.

[kujay]

Toews, on his first fighting major:

 

"I was sitting in the [penalty] box and I was asking the guy if they actually gave me five minutes," Toews said. "I didn't even know if they called that a fight. I couldn't get my left glove off so I was more worried about just making sure he wasn't throwing at me. Next time I'm in that situation I'll be a little bit more confident on how to protect myself and do the right things.

 

"Sometimes things like that happen and you can't back down from it. You just have to step up and protect yourself and do what you have to do. "

 

Many NHL fights help change the momentum of games and fire up teammates, but Toews said his fight didn't do much for the flow of the game.

 

"It wasn't like I was throwing haymakers and the guys were getting all pumped on the bench," the center said. "Sometimes it's necessary. At that point in the game I didn't want to spend five minutes in the penalty box. I got out of it without getting hurt and that's the main thing."

 

Awesome. He didn't even know if he'd get a major for that scrum. Toews isn't as big, but I want to see more Roenick in him. I don't mean fighting, because he correctly pointed out that the Hawks can't have him off the ice for five minutes at a time, but being physical would add another element to his game when he's not lighting the lamp.

 

Kuc is also reported that Q might be dispensing with the goaltender rotation and going with Khabi. I think that will last until his next crappy game. Anyway, Khabi is starting tonight.

 

I also read somewhere this morning that Dallas leads the league in goals scored at home and goals allowed at home. So I say 1-0 Hawks.

[Cynosure]

Toews, on his first fighting major:

 

"I was sitting in the [penalty] box and I was asking the guy if they actually gave me five minutes," Toews said. "I didn't even know if they called that a fight. I couldn't get my left glove off so I was more worried about just making sure he wasn't throwing at me. Next time I'm in that situation I'll be a little bit more confident on how to protect myself and do the right things.

 

"Sometimes things like that happen and you can't back down from it. You just have to step up and protect yourself and do what you have to do. "

 

Many NHL fights help change the momentum of games and fire up teammates, but Toews said his fight didn't do much for the flow of the game.

 

"It wasn't like I was throwing haymakers and the guys were getting all pumped on the bench," the center said. "Sometimes it's necessary. At that point in the game I didn't want to spend five minutes in the penalty box. I got out of it without getting hurt and that's the main thing."

 

Awesome. He didn't even know if he'd get a major for that scrum. Toews isn't as big, but I want to see more Roenick in him. I don't mean fighting, because he correctly pointed out that the Hawks can't have him off the ice for five minutes at a time, but being physical would add another element to his game when he's not lighting the lamp.

 

Kuc is also reported that Q might be dispensing with the goaltender rotation and going with Khabi. I think that will last until his next crappy game. Anyway, Khabi is starting tonight.

 

I also read somewhere this morning that Dallas leads the league in goals scored at home and goals allowed at home. So I say 1-0 Hawks.

 

Toews is awesome. I still think the most hilarious fight that could ever happen would be Kane vs Crosby.

[kujay]

More great morning reading from the Tribune:

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/hockey/blackhawks/chi-blackhawks-john-mcdonough-out-loud,0,6533291.story?page=2

 

But this part just makes me shake my head. No forward thinking by that freaking goof Pulford.

 

McDonough said:

 

I made a presentation before I started with the Cubs in 1983 to Bob Pulford. I had already been hired by the Cubs. I had such a strong interest to work for the Blackhawks. I spent about an hour in front of Bob Pulford with a complete marketing plan. A to Z on what I would do to try and help build this fan base long-term. He couldn't have been more polite. He was a wonderful gentleman and at the end of it he just said, "I really appreciate you doing it. I don't think it's something we want to implement at this time."

[Cynosure]

Avery is gonna be a bitch tonight, I can't wait.

[Cynosure]

STARS GOAL

 

7:37 - Morrow scores (5), assisted by Parrish (1) and Modano (7).

 

Stars lead 1-0.

[Cynosure]

HAWKS GOAL

 

19:23 - Kane scores (9), assisted by Eager (1) and Walker (1).

 

Tie game 1-1.

Edited November 21, 2008 by Cynosure

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I love talent goals.

 

Toews keeps the puck away from the defense for several seconds with a couple guys on him, Eager makes the pass of his life and Kane puts a sniping wrister into the net. 1-1.

[Cynosure]

I love talent goals.

 

Toews keeps the puck away from the defense for several seconds with a couple guys on him, Eager makes the pass of his life and Kane puts a sniping wrister into the net. 1-1.

 

I love Patrick Kane even if he does bug the hell out of me chewing on that damn mouthguard.

[Cynosure]

Byfuglien possibly traded for Nylander.