Hawks beat Rangers 4-3, fire Q anyway

Hawks beat Rangers 4-3, fire Q anyway

What a bizarre game. From the start of this game, I was not very impressed by either team and I'm not very impressed by this win. A win is a win I suppose, and the Hawks sure need the points, but it was really kind of a steal of a game where the Hawks got the lucky bounce despite getting outplayed in the third. Whether it was a matter of the Hawks getting some luck or the Rangers extending bad luck, the Hawks capitalized on a turnover, scored a goal and then scored another 60 seconds later and just like that, turned the game on a dime.

First period, both teams were guilty of cutesy bullshit passes instead of putting on net. Neither team put up double digits in shots on goal and hits were even at ten each. In the last couple minutes I felt like the Rangers were starting to get some edge and the Hawks were having trouble getting the puck cleared. Finally, with less than a minute to go, Seabrook takes the puck up the boards to Emery's right and passes to Stalberg who is on the boards looking up ice. He bobbles the puck, loses his stick, and Kane gets his stick lifted by a Ranger who puts it to Anisimov. As Anisimov is skating in on Emery Seabrook and Stalberg are kind of watching in amazement from the boards, and then, Seabrook for some inexplicable reason gives HIS stick to Stalberg and then tries to go after Anisimov without a cue!

Second period was a better effort from the Hawks. Bollig started the period by dropping the gloves early with Rupp. Bollig landed better jabs to start the bout, but was never able to tie up Rupp's right hand and took a couple of solid shots because of it. Give him credit for taking that fight. For the most part, the Rangers were starting to play a tight game and the Hawks were not challenging the slot. Then with about five minutes to go, Oduya got the puck at the blue line, wound up to slap it, but then pulled it back and moved to his left before letting it go. This perfectly opened up the shooting lane and Shaw got a perfect deflection on it.

In the third, the Rangers caught the Hawks in a sloppy clear and put it in with a scrum of players in front of Emery. From here, the Rangers really started driving the bus. They finished every check, they fought for every puck and outworked the Hawks. However, with about seven minutes to go, Kane picked up a bouncing puck at the top of the slot, passed it to Hossa on Lundqvists left who quickly passed it to a wide open Sharp on Lundqvist's right. Without that kind of puck movement, the Hawks had no chance of beating King Henrik tonight. After tying it, the Hawks finally got some jump in their strides and started to bring it. 62 seconds later the puck squirted over to Oduya's point and he one timed is clean past the King. After that Kane got an empty netter and the Rangers came back and picked up a lucky one when Keith was not able to swat away a bouncing puck in front of the crease.

Random thoughts: Hammer returns! Meh. He played third pair minutes and was a +1. I think he's got some work to do to displace Oduya and get back on second pair. Seabrook was not looking very good to me. He got danced around a few times and I still don't get what the hell he was trying to do on that first goal. Oduya was great to watch, but oh yeah, Bowman is an idiot who can't judge talent. Nice to see Shaw get back on the score sheet. That kid is fearless. In the third, Q switched up the the lines and moved Sharp up with Kane and Hossa. While I don't think that's any kind of thing to count on in the future, it worked tonight.

NY played a predictable road game. They were consistent with hitting, they didn't take a ton of chances and were it not for a shitty bounce late in the third, they would have won this game pretty easily. Much as I'd like to say the Hawks won a gritty game, I really feel like they just got lucky. At this point, I guess all that matters is to try and hold their place in line while waiting for Toews to return. Oduya is becoming a nice addition that I hope sticks around next year, and guys like Shaw, Bollig, Hayes and Olsen are getting valuable ice time. Overall though, I don't think anything has really changed. But hey, winning on a Friday night beats losing.


Leave a comment
  • While I make it a point in life not to call anyone an idiot. Bowman is not a good judge of talent.

    And yes, fire Q anyway.

    Oduya's goal was a deflect off of a Ranger stick. Nice to see it go the 'hawks way for a change.

    Rangers b2b games and 4 in 6 says about all that needs to said about this win. Another lacklustre mean nothing inter-conference game for them.

    Huge two points for the 'hawks and I'm reluctantly ready to concede that they will make the playoffs. Somehow that doesn't leave me too optimistic.

  • Thanks for getting the wrap Vegas, it has been a long week and I needed to blow off some steam last night.

    The recent trends of this team have moved me to have a loss for words at times. Honestly, I have a hard time getting a grip on what they are doing, and where they are going sometimes.

    With that said, it was really nice to see them battle back using the only consistent skill they have (scoring goals). It was also nice to see Emery get the better of Lundqvist.

    The best response I have to what we have seen lately, is that the Hawks are looking more like the team from early season play, which is to say that they are finding wins in games they maybe shouldn't have won, and are day to day as far as performance goes.

    What has changed from my opinion is A.) They are learning to win without Toews (especially where face-offs are concerned), B.) The goaltending is more solid with Emery, C.) Oduya has been a nice fit, along with Olsen and Lepisto, which has brought about slight improvements on the back-end, and D.) They are no longer a favored team heading into the playoffs.

    And I agree with FF, last night's win sealed a playoff birth in my eyes. Although, who knows, there is still room to screw it all up.

    I also think that Bollig has been a nice add. He classes up the joint.

    Again, nice to see the result, but 3 goals on 6 shots in the 3rd is not ever going to happen again.

  • I had to go back and fix something this morning, in the third period, I mean to say they could not have scored WITHOUT moving the puck the way they did. For the most part, this was a typical Hawks game, no push to the crease and as a team, they got outhit 2-1 although Bickell is continuing to channel his inner Buff and try to be relevant as the season winds down. It's hard for me to say they battled back. Once they scored to tie it up, there was no doubt they picked up their up game and started to push. However, the goal they scored was really more a bad bounce for the Rangers then anything else.

    Ironically, if the Hawks finish in the sixth spot, they could very well face a team with a record worse then theirs. I have mixed feelings about this. I guess what I ultimately want is to see a massive paradigm shift occur in the organization over the summer. If they limp in and get hot, it's going to distort things. Across this entire season, there have only been a handful of players that have left me with the impression that they are competitors who will bring it every game. And what about coaching? If we believe Q is the fountainhead of suck, how do you judge players if they are playing a flawed system? I dunno. I feel like the deeper the Hawks go, the greater the distortion of what needs to be done.

  • In reply to VegasHawksFan:

    "And what about coaching? If we believe Q is the fountainhead of suck, how do you judge players if they are playing a flawed system?"

    These are the horns of the dilemma. Is it SB and his lack of good personnel judgments, is it Q and his inappropriate system, his mishandling of the players, or the players themselves, which takes us back to SB … and 'round and 'round we go …

    "I ultimately want is to see a massive paradigm shift occur in the organization over the summer"

    Me too!

    "I feel like the deeper the Hawks go, the greater the distortion of what needs to be done."

    Sentiments echoed here too!

  • I guess the usual blogger headline itch struck you, in that there is nothing I see in the body of the post that supports firing or not firing Q.

    Also not mentioned who would be better than Q that the Hawks can and should hire.

    Also, the last sentence of the first paragraph is how most hockey games go, as far as scoring, unless it is an 8-0 blowout, and most hockey games aren't.

Leave a comment