Grudge Match or Clown Shoes?

Well, the Hawks are back at it tonight to start the circus trip in Vancouver. For the Nucks, the goalie everybody loves to see get pulled will be out with an upper body injury. Sadly, this negates the setup for jokes speculating what part of his lower body is bruised or tender. As of now, Bolland is a possibility while Seabrook is likely not. Listening to Q on the Hawks website, I would I would also expect Scott to be in. Offensively, the Hawks top guns all look healthy and after the ass whippin they got at the UC, they should be sufficiently motivated. Toews, as always, said the right things in the locker room after practice today. Hopefully his team will take his attitude into this contest.

It was cool to see the PP score the other day, but let's be realistic, 5-5 play is where the Hawks will win or lose. If the Hawks start going to the box again, they will lose. If they don't stand up for each other, they will lose. If they don't go to the net like they did in the last couple of games, they will lose. As a team, the Canucks, to me, are a team completely without pride. There is no bitch tactic that is beneath them to deploy and last year there was no victory in the playoffs they didn't want to celebrate with a confetti shower. The Sedins WILL repeatedly skate into the crease at a whistle and spray Crawford with a snow shower unless guys like Montador and Keith stop them before they get there (don't hold your breath waiting for that). Once they establish space with their little shower, they will dive like they got hit by a bus if anyone challenges them.

Weaknesses of the Hawks to exploit include, not clearing the crease or challenging players after a whistle, lack of willingness to constantly drive the opposing net and screen the goalie, lack of willingness to step up and match the Nucks hit for hit and lack of focus or lack of patience to endure the endless diving of the Sedin bitches. Vancouver's game will be to exploit weakness, but they are not without the ability to step up and play hockey if the Hawks come out of the gate ready to go. Head to head, I think this year's Hawks team is the better team and with the Nuck's typical overconfidence/inferiority complex, I think the Hawks have a good chance to catch them in some home game smugness after their "Historic Slaying of The Dragon" last year.

To the readers who stop by but don't post, we say thanks for stopping by and encourage you to leave a post sometime.

Filed under: Pregame, View from the Bench

Tags: Pregame


Leave a comment
  • I need to write Q a letter asking about John Scott. I need some clarification, some reasoning, an excuse to the excessive playing of Scott. Like I mentioned in the last post, he is not playing terribly or anything, but the choice still makes no sense at all. At least, it has something to do with Seabrook this time, but we still have other options. Scott is likely to get abused by Vancouver's speed, and never be in position to hit, or "fight" anyone.

    Has anybody found anything on the net with Q talking about Scott? There has to be a secret reason that nobody else is aware of.

    The Circus trip has always been thought of as a measuring stick for the Hawks. Tonights game will decide whether or not we use a yard stick or a ruler.

    Agreed, get to the net, and be in their faces before they get a chance to be in yours. If they give Sedin a bump before he gets to Crow in an attempt to snow him, no penalty. If they hit him after the fact, most likely a penalty. The Hawks need to be smart, play their game, and be ready at all moments.

    Should be fired up for this one.

  • Seems like you and the announcers at the last game failed to notice the snow showers didn't get much above the goalie's knees. But I guess this blog isn't about making sense.

  • In reply to GTVic:

    If Crawford is standing, it's at his knees. If he's down making a save it's in his face. The Hawks have played three games since then and I don't remember any other opposing player doing that. Snow showers are a taunt regardless of whether the snow hits the face or not. If the taunt is coming from an agitator, you expect it. When it comes from players with the Sedin's skills just to try and draw a penalty for retaliation, it's a punk move.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to VegasHawksFan:

    You're way off base their, Henrik did it twice during the game both times Crawford was upright in either the butterfly position or standing. Daniel didn't do it at all, so it wasn't the Sedins as you suggested, but then what would one expect from someone so ignorant and biased as you. Also the Sedins never dive, you could say that about Burrows or Lapierre but saying that about the Sedins shows your total lack of anything resembling hockey knowledge.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to James Williams:


  • In reply to James Williams:

    I am going to have to (sort of) disagree with you. There is an admittance to the event in question by yourself. Crawford was not standing on either situations though. He was still down (yes, in a butterfly once, but in a kneeling position the other if I recall). You are right about which Sedin, but outside the Canucks world, no one makes any distinction between the 2.

    Where i have to completely disagree is on the dive statement. It might be something that only happens in games against the Hawks, but they sure do take dives. No question about it.

    I am glad your reading though, and obviously enough to know about our total lack of anything resembling hockey knowledge.
    Cheers Brother.

  • In reply to Hostile Hawk:

    Oops, I forgot to point out that the butterfly is considered to be a point when the goaltender is down.

  • In reply to James Williams:

    Absolutely I am biased, are you surprised to see this on a Hawks blog? Maybe we should be as classy as Nucksmisconduct?

    It's kind of funny the defense is that these two OTHER guys on my team may be divers, but never a Sedin. Please.

    You're right James, I'm not a Sedin fan boy, and I don't like the Canucks. Despite this, I can readily admit what a good team they are and in fact, I thought they were a better team then Boston was last year though I'm in a minority on this site with that outlook. Thanks for posting and feel free to come back an enlighten us with your hockey wisdom, we can always use the traffic. I know we'll see you tomorrow if the Nucks win.

  • I'm not as concerned with Scott as I am with Bickel. If he doesn't finish checks and make his physical presence known, he has no business taking up a roster spot. From my couch he looks disinterested during his ice time.

    They must be trying to "showcase" Scott to show a value to trade him. There's no other reason to play him in place of than Lepisto. Although I think he's not been a liability so far, but falling down too often.

  • In reply to Jerry Kayne:

    YES! I agree on the Scott thing. That was what I was trying to get at I guess. Something bigger must be in motion to explain his continual appearances on the ice.

    On Bickell, guess that day off didn't light a fire under his rear. Same old performance. A shame too, with what seems to be talent hiding in there somewhere.

  • Sedins don't dive , the Pope isn't Catholic and bears don't defecate on the road. I live in Canuckia and if they didn't play hockey they would be on Sweden's Olympic diving squad.

    Maybe they are hoping to package Bickell and Scott. Given training camp, Hayes, Morin, Pirri or even Saad might have made an appearance given Bickell's lack of interest. To be charitable, perhaps he has an upper body injury.

    Leading the league so why change ? Who knows.

Leave a comment