Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Re: Chicago Blackhawks 2013 Playoffs

jersey cubs fan

By jersey cubs fan,
in Other Sports

 Share
Banedon GOAT

Banedon

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
Great win. For the first time this series though I don't feel like the Hawks are the better team.

 

This is just ridiculous. Hawks have had a positive Corsi in every game this series, and only once by less than double digits (game 1: +51, game 2: +13, game 3: +7, game 4: +14). The Hawks have clearly been the better team in this series, both by eye test (games 1, 2 and 4 all looked like the Hawks carried more of the play) and even more by the numbers, and now they have home ice in a best of 3. The Bruins are the best team the Hawks have played so it looks more even, but the Hawks are still the better team.

 

 

Very silly to read this given the facts completely contradict it. Maybe it's fan pessimism that makes people come to these wrong conclusions, but I don't really get it.

 

I don't even understand what raw meant by that. If you thought the Blackhawks were the better team prior to last night, how did last night change your opinion that they are not the better team. I think they are clearly the more talented team out there, with Boston's advantage being completely dependent on the ridiculous shot blocking.

 

I often wonder if I'm watching the same game that other internet denizens are watching.

  • Replies 4.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Soul MVP

Soul

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted

I think it's because, relatively speaking, the Bruins are actually a worthy opponent. The Wild, Wings, and Kings weren't really on this level for various reasons. Wild were just bad. Wings were a 7 seed that played over their head for 3 games. Kings were too banged up to really hang.

 

Bruins are actually a threat. Doesn't mean they are better. But they belong here.

squally1313 Myrtle Beach Pelicans

squally1313

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
I noticed things like this after Game 1, when most Chicago fans thought Boston was the better team, and most Boston fans thought Chicago was the better team. I think the reality is that Boston and Chicago are simply on another level compared to almost every other team in hockey, and we "get used" to watching our teams dominate. When they go up against a team that can relatively match them in overall skill level, we look worse relative to every other game. Ultimately, I think the margin is extremely thin, but I would give us (and stats back it up) a slight edge.
rawaction Chicago Cubs

rawaction

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Great win. For the first time this series though I don't feel like the Hawks are the better team.

 

This is just ridiculous. Hawks have had a positive Corsi in every game this series, and only once by less than double digits (game 1: +51, game 2: +13, game 3: +7, game 4: +14). The Hawks have clearly been the better team in this series, both by eye test (games 1, 2 and 4 all looked like the Hawks carried more of the play) and even more by the numbers, and now they have home ice in a best of 3. The Bruins are the best team the Hawks have played so it looks more even, but the Hawks are still the better team.

 

 

Very silly to read this given the facts completely contradict it. Maybe it's fan pessimism that makes people come to these wrong conclusions, but I don't really get it.

 

I don't even understand what raw meant by that. If you thought the Blackhawks were the better team prior to last night, how did last night change your opinion that they are not the better team. I think they are clearly the more talented team out there, with Boston's advantage being completely dependent on the ridiculous shot blocking.

 

I thought the Hawks were marginally better before the series. I think the Bruins are marginally better now (lesser margin). I don't think the shot blocking is ridiculous. At some point, you gotta give them some credit for being good at it. Did it vs. Pittsburgh too. Maybe I am being too pessimistic, because I've been waiting for the shoe to drop on Crawford all year (just like I did with Niemi a few years ago)...... but the shot blocking, the power play efficiency, defense, and the ways they have scored this series seem more sustainable. Both Hawks wins have come on flukish type goals from 30+ feet away. Seems like rebounds and breakaways are leading to the Hawks scores, while Boston's chances are coming more consistently. I don't know. I expected a good series, but maybe I still got Game 3 on the brain. And I'll admit I expected the Hawks to coast last night the way they were playing, after it was 3-1 and 4-2, but Boston obviously didn't go away. I thought that was as good of an offensive game as the Hawks can possibly have in this series. Yet, it was barely enough to win.

 

That being said, I still expect the Hawks to win. Home ice should be huge.

jersey cubs fan GOAT

jersey cubs fan

Old-Timey Member
Posted
  • Author
Posted

I thought the Hawks were marginally better before the series. I think the Bruins are marginally better now (lesser margin). I don't think the shot blocking is ridiculous. At some point, you gotta give them some credit for being good at it. Did it vs. Pittsburgh too.

 

They are ridiculously good at it. I never suggested it was luck or anything. It's practically their entire team identity. It worked to shut down Pittsburgh, but it hasn't exactly had the same effect on the Blackhawks.

 

Maybe I am being too pessimistic, because I've been waiting for the shoe to drop on Crawford all year (just like I did with Niemi a few years ago)...... but the shot blocking, the power play efficiency, defense, and the ways they have scored this series seem more sustainable. Both Hawks wins have come on flukish type goals from 30+ feet away. Seems like rebounds and breakaways are leading to the Hawks scores, while Boston's chances are coming more consistently.

 

I'm not sure how you can describe the Blackhawks goals as flukish but not the Bruins.

kujay Iowa Cubs

kujay

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
I noticed things like this after Game 1, when most Chicago fans thought Boston was the better team, and most Boston fans thought Chicago was the better team. I think the reality is that Boston and Chicago are simply on another level compared to almost every other team in hockey, and we "get used" to watching our teams dominate. When they go up against a team that can relatively match them in overall skill level, we look worse relative to every other game. Ultimately, I think the margin is extremely thin, but I would give us (and stats back it up) a slight edge.

 

There's a lot to be said for this. I was talking to my boss (a Blues fan) the other day and he pointed out that whenever the Hawks lose, I blame it on them rather than giving credit to the other team. And it's because I'm used to seeing them dominate when at even 75% of what they can do. This is the first series in these playoffs where I've realized I have to give the other team some credit. Now, that said, I don't think Boston can stop the Hawks if they are flying, but look at the first period of Game 2. We destroyed them and only came out up 1-0. Against Philly we were up 3-0 when that happened. LA it was 4-0, I think.

bcl412 South Bend Cubs

bcl412

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

I thought the Hawks were marginally better before the series. I think the Bruins are marginally better now (lesser margin). I don't think the shot blocking is ridiculous. At some point, you gotta give them some credit for being good at it. Did it vs. Pittsburgh too.

 

They are ridiculously good at it. I never suggested it was luck or anything. It's practically their entire team identity. It worked to shut down Pittsburgh, but it hasn't exactly had the same effect on the Blackhawks.

 

Maybe I am being too pessimistic, because I've been waiting for the shoe to drop on Crawford all year (just like I did with Niemi a few years ago)...... but the shot blocking, the power play efficiency, defense, and the ways they have scored this series seem more sustainable. Both Hawks wins have come on flukish type goals from 30+ feet away. Seems like rebounds and breakaways are leading to the Hawks scores, while Boston's chances are coming more consistently.

 

I'm not sure how you can describe the Blackhawks goals as flukish but not the Bruins.

 

I'm not sure there's such thing as a flukish OT goal when everyone's tired as hell. Plus, pretty sure the Bruins goal in game 2 was similar. The Hawks also had a ton of quality chances that whole first period while the Bruins had none. As has been said, both teams have had flashes of great hockey.

rawaction Chicago Cubs

rawaction

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Looks like a real effort by them to get the puck to Crawford's glove side. And by us to over play to that side. Hawks look quick and well rested.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Cubs community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of North Side Baseball.

Become a Caretaker

  • Member Statistics

    6,793
    Total Members
    13,056
    Most Online
    Kevin OBrien
    Newest Member
    Kevin OBrien
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...