The Sky(e) isn't falling - The Hawks only lost one

by Killion on May 18, 2009 7:51 PM CDT

First things first:

Don_t_panic_medium

The Blackhawks lost the first game, yes. It sucks. It happens.

The Hawks also dropped the first game in the last series too if you'll remember as far back as almost 3 weeks ago. They didn't quite look as sloppy as they did yesterday but there's no reason to write this series off as this guy seems to do. How sick of you are hearing about "experience"? Lazy lazy lazy.

The Hawks seemingly get better as series go on... and they'll need to get better quick if they want this series to go on so lets hope that happens.

Now that that's out of the way - lets look at something different

There's a lot of noise being thrown around because Kane and Toews were both -3. We've said it before on this site and we'll say it again - plus/minus are fun to look at but they really don't mean shit.

Can you really blame Kane and Toews being on the ice for Cleary's first goal? Toews won a face off clean, Biscuit biffed on it and Cleary was off. It was a goal that shouldn't have happened (on at least two levels) but still Toews and Kane are hardly to blame for it.

Look at the CORSI ratings and things are different. With the Hawks giving up 43 shots no one's looking all that great but Toews and Kane are both near the top in that rating, at -1 and -4 respectively. And just for kicks, Sharp and Barker are tops on the Hawks yesterday with an even 0 rating. There's something that needs to change.

Here's some positive news - the Hawks blocked a season high 20 shots. OK - I don't know if that's actually a season high but it was certainly more noticeable than other games.

Tweet Comment 14 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

The Sky(e) is Falling

I am sick and tired about hearing how great Detroit is. The Hawks gave away the game yesterday. Plain and simple.

by MissConduct10 on May 18, 2009 8:11 PM CDT reply actions

To put it another way

We are being very undude at the moment. Nothing is, as they say, fucked, in the parlance of our times. Etc.

A sweep of Detroit was, all things considered, unrealistic. If you asked anybody who has followed this team for any amount of time this year if they would take a split, they would get down on your knees and kiss your feet. (They could kiss something else, but this is a family blog, dammit.)

So what can the Hawks do to improve? Plenty.

Job one — realize that Khabby is a human being. This necessarily means that you can’t expect to win if you don’t protect the puck. Duncan Keith and Brent Seabrook have to play much better than they did in Game One. There were two plays that they completely muffed. That has to be kept to an absolute minimum.

The offensive side of things, in truth, wasn’t all that horrible. Yes: Toews was kept off the score sheet, but that was only because of Osgood turning in an all-world performance on that flurry that finished with two Toews shots in close. That said: Toews and Kaner need to turn in a good effort on Tuesday. Meanwhile: Buff has to return to the run of form he had against the Canucks. Everybody else has to just keep plugging away — shots on net, traffic, moving with and without the puck. They get the extra day off after Game Two, so there should be no reason why a balls-to-the-wall effort for 60 minutes cannot be displayed. They have it in them — they should have some faith in theirselves and just mash.

WAIT FOR THE WHISTLE!

by Sec 326 Bureau Chief on May 18, 2009 8:26 PM CDT reply actions

Series far from over!!!

The Hawks lost. So What? It’s only one game and in the last round 3 out the 4 teams that won Game 1 eventually lost the series so let’s not go too overboard.
With that said the Hawks did lose an excellent opportunity to jump on the Wings early and put their backs against the wall early in this series if they had been able to come away with a victory in Sunday’s tilt. That didn’t happen so let’s all move on.
The Hawks will suprise all (like the rest of the postseason so far) and will play better and don’t be suprised if they come away with a split. I’m sure they’re sick and tired of hearing how good the Wings are and that might just be the right medicine the Hawks need in order to be victorious, a little pissed-off anger.
After reading that article by Darren Eliot I wonder if he had Pierre McGuire proof-read that for him!!!

by hawks61 on May 18, 2009 8:35 PM CDT reply actions

A Day Removed

Posted this in Sams recap but this is the better place for it: (Can I delete that one?)

Well that was just the way I pictured a loss going. Too many many turnovers and too many sloppy plays. Biscuit whiffing on the puck (i know, i know, bad hop) and Keith getting out-manned behind our net- we just need better play out of our best defensemen. We stayed in the game longer than deserved with Khabby playing out of his mind. We certainly outplayed them the first 10 minutes, but you can’t dominate the energy level for an entire 60- especially on the road.

Its going to take better hockey. Smarter decisions, being strong with the puck, all the stupid cheesy shit. The Scum are just too damn good to keep giving chances. The Hawks have it in them, we have seen it in the last few weeks. Their best is good enough

by ChargingMajor on May 18, 2009 8:54 PM CDT reply actions

Not to mention,

they both got charged for a minus on the empty net goal.

FifthFeather.com

by El Duque's Raft on May 18, 2009 9:14 PM CDT reply actions

I knew I should have looked at their other stats.. but like most “journalists” i’m lazy

Second City Hockey

by Killion on May 18, 2009 9:18 PM CDT up reply actions

Too true

All good stuff here. I think it looked like we played worse than we did for the obvious reason, but we have to play 60 minutes of stellar hockey more than once this series to make it happen. Not too tall an order by any stretch. We rattled them early, we scored first, hell… the score was 2-2 with only 12.5 minutes left in the third. There is some good here. HAWKS!!

"Call Detroit, tell dem... BULLSHIT!"

by Hungryhawk on May 18, 2009 9:19 PM CDT reply actions

Inquiry

Game Two meetup at a bar of choice for us? Planning purposes only — no pressure.

WAIT FOR THE WHISTLE!

by Sec 326 Bureau Chief on May 18, 2009 9:28 PM CDT reply actions

umm… ookley at the ainmey icturepey. Is that even how you do it?? I’m an idiot. The place without the german beer chief

by ChargingMajor on May 18, 2009 9:30 PM CDT up reply actions

It’s the fucking whirlaway.. drink at the whirlaway

Second City Hockey

by Killion on May 19, 2009 12:13 AM CDT up reply actions

Wow!!!!

subtlety is strong in here!!!!

SHOOOOOOOT IT!!!! Anon

by burpchelischili on May 19, 2009 5:30 AM CDT up reply actions

haha… that clears it up some

by ChargingMajor on May 19, 2009 8:19 AM CDT up reply actions

there are usually two sides on this argument

I am on the other when arguing for +/-. Its simple, your on the ice or not. You can break it down “well things played out like this so it really wasn’t there fault…” thats crap, how things happen changes the complexion of the game.

are we going to say that Keith’s impressive +/- was just luck? No, its an indicator of his talent as a defensemen.

-1 occurred on the empty netter for Kane/Toews…unfortunately, regardless if there is a goalie, you still have to keep the forecheck up in the offensive zone.

Should +/- be the sole statistic? Absolutely not. But it is an excellent resource in finding where things went wrong.

by torpedo0126 on May 19, 2009 8:47 AM CDT reply actions

There are better measures for sure

Granted, +/- will balance out a lot of the odd goals. For every Toews/Kane that gets a – for the first Cleary goal when they did nothing wrong, there are Wings (Lidstrom for one) that gets a + without doing anything.

Even though it evens out over time, it is pretty obvious that it is a bad stat to use to judge a single game performance. You don’t learn much from +/- when at least 7 of the 10 skaters had nothing to do with the play yet are affected by it. (Cleary, Biscuit, and maybe Keith- who probably did about all he could to force Cleary to the outside)

by ChargingMajor on May 19, 2009 10:17 AM CDT up reply actions