clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

We Just Don't Have The Right Accent: Canucks 3 - Hawks 0

New, comments

I get the feeling I'm supposed to rant and rave here about what a terrible insult it is to be shutout by the Canucks at home.  I can do that if you want, but it's not what I feel.  Honestly, I just don't think it was that poor of an effort, and like I had a sneaking suspicion of, Roberto Luongo had himself a very solid game.  Was it one of the Hawks best efforts of the year?  No.  But was it the complete capitulation of the Edmonton defeats or New Jersey?  Far from that as well.  To the bullets:

-The first goal was a result of a John Scott turnover at center ice.  But to rant against a John Scott turnover would be the very definition of shouting at the rain.  Water seeks its own level, John Scott will turn over the puck.  Past that, Marty Turco must cover that puck or Marlboro 72 must find a way to clear it, because it was lying there for an eternity.

-It's no secret how to beat the Canucks.  You simply waltz through their softy defense and make Luongo's life hell by being in the crease at all times.  But you know what?  The Hawks don't have those guns.  Aside from maybe Brouwer, they are equipped with guys who want to skate and create space to take the shots that the monoliths they don't have are supposed to screen.  But Brouwer is skating with Bolland so he's not going to be able to screen any shots, because there won't be any.  Tomas Kopecky is not an Earth mover.  So while they had their chances, most of their shots were from the perimeter which Borat will stop all day.

-That said, Kane and Kopecky simply have to bury the golden opportunities they were presented-

-To be fair, Luongo was excellent tonight.  Whatever his playoff record is, during the regular season he is among the elite.

-Notice how when the Canucks got a power play and Kesler to the crease, Turco didn't have a clue on Ehrhoff's goal.

-While Turco was far from awful, it's three goals on 18 shots.  The first he should have covered, we've been over the second, and the third he stopped the breakaway so he can't be expected to back in position for a rebound.  Still, I'll be flabbergasted if Crawford doesn't start Sunday.

-Looking to the sky on down, searching for Bolland with my good eye closed.

-Is it clear yet that this Sharp and Seabrook together on the first PP unit makes no sense?

-CORSI.  The only ones to end up negative were Marlboro 72 and Scott.  Keith and Seabrook saw the Sedins most of the night.

-Strangely, the Hawks didn't get murdered on faceoffs.

-So the boneheaded Tomas Kopecky penalty in the 3rd, that's like a thing now, right?

-To me, this is just a game the that was a loss.  There isn't too much to complain about, they played ok and ran into a goaltender who was far better than ok.  Yes, the 3rd could've been better but the Canucks are kind of built to shut you down when up.  But what's scary is that after all the losses that were mailed in as they couldn't wait to throw 'em back and poll the electorate has eroded the margin for error for the games where they do play well and lose.  I don't know how many at least decent efforts they can afford to chuk, I just know it isn't many.