IGT: 01/22/2013 St. Louis Blues @ Chicago Blackhawks

[HawkWriter]

So let me get this straight from some of you...you want to change the lines and move players around now? before any type of slump?

some (a couple) are bitching about jamal mayers and him playing? is that really what we are complaining about? If the 4th line center is our biggest problem im (most fans should be) ok with that. I mean pick your complaints.

leave the team as is until a struggle.

and lol....no we arent built like the caps.

So upgrading a goalie is okay but it isn't okay to upgrade on faceoffs?

The Hawks are doing great right now but there is room for improvement in certain areas.

This is how I think of it...you have a company that is just killing it. Doing great and making a profit. Sales is doin great, Customer Service is great, but the marketing department sucks. Do you just continue to let that happen? Nah...shift some things around, even if a select few aren't thrilled, but make sure your company is stronger for the future.

Not talking big changes here. However, have to feel that faceoffs could cost the Blackhawks down the line.

 

[Gunzaan]

Sorrry, didn't address the Capitals comment - sure, we haven't yet had their measure of regular season success combined with their playoff failure, but based off last year and the current roster we have... We are on pace to be paper regular season champs, with a touch of playoff failure once again. Crawford + a weak powerplay + weak center play (faceoffs) in the playoffs = early round exit. Besides Crawford playing well for 2 regular season games, I see a lot of what I saw last year.

 

[DewsSox79]

for 1: they arent bad at faceoffs....lets just start there.

and yes i would prefer to address goaltending well before i start tinkering with the lines. especially the useless worry of jamal mayers and and andrew shaw.

The regular season is very important as JNTG stated as I would want home ice advantage as much as I possibly could get. the kings winning the cup is a very very rare accomplishment coming from an 8th seed.

goaltending change wouldnt destroy line chemistry, maybe it would make the defense work less harder to make up for a weak tandem. but to start fucking with the lines to see a GREATER increase in faceoff differential is just stupid logic. Im the first one that bashed bolland, but if these lines work....keep it going and ride it as long as possible. i think the complaints as of now are stupid and unwarranted.

 

[Jntg4]

So upgrading a goalie is okay but it isn't okay to upgrade on faceoffs?

The Hawks are doing great right now but there is room for improvement in certain areas.

This is how I think of it...you have a company that is just killing it. Doing great and making a profit. Sales is doin great, Customer Service is great, but the marketing department sucks. Do you just continue to let that happen? Nah...shift some things around, even if a select few aren't thrilled, but make sure your company is stronger for the future.

Not talking big changes here. However, have to feel that faceoffs could cost the Blackhawks down the line.

Sorry, but as far as I know a change in net does not alter the offensive lines that are currently gelling? Meanwhile, changing those lines does.

 

[DewsSox79]

Sorry, but as far as I know a change in net does not alter the offensive lines that are currently gelling? Meanwhile, changing those lines does.

not to mention that upgrading a goalie is much more significant than upgrading the faceoffs on the 3rd and 4th line. finally we agree on something

 

[Jntg4]

not to mention that upgrading a goalie is much more significant than upgrading the faceoffs on the 3rd and 4th line. finally we agree on something

It's pretty hard not to have the same opinion on this haha. I mean, I know you agree with mountsalami's shit, but typically when something this fucking dumb is posted with rationale as poor as this, everyone else is forced to agree with each other.

 

[DewsSox79]

It's pretty hard not to have the same opinion on this haha. I mean, I know you agree with mountsalami's shit, but typically when something this fucking dumb is posted with rationale as poor as this, everyone else is forced to agree with each other.

hehe pretty much

 

[Gunzaan]

Yah, cause Shaw has been awesome as the 3C... Riiiiiiight. And Hawkswriter provided a couple of people out there that might be available, plus a proven faceoff winner sitting on the bench in Mayers. I highly doubt changing a third or fourth line center will change the offense that much, considering the first two lines are doing the majority of the scoring. And of course, we'd all like an upgrade at goaltender but thats not the issue.

You guys can bury your head in the sand if you want. I'm estatic about the start for the Hawks but there is nothing wrong with evaluating their weaknesses too. The fact that jntg4 doesn't agree just adds validity to the argument.

 

[Jntg4]

Yah, cause Shaw has been awesome as the 3C... Riiiiiiight. And Hawkswriter provided a couple of people out there that might be available, plus a proven faceoff winner sitting on the bench in Mayers. I highly doubt changing a third or fourth line center will change the offense that much, considering the first two lines are doing the majority of the scoring. And of course, we'd all like an upgrade at goaltender but thats not the issue.

You don't think a lack of secondary scoring would be a problem? Can't rely entirely on Toews/Kane/Hossa/Sharp. While they've not been lighting up the lamp (3 of team's 17 goals between two lines), they've been playing generally good shifts and haven't been playing poorly at all. There doesn't appear to be much disconnect, besides how Shaw, Stalberg, and Bickell all are below average at passing, so there isn't that big of a reason to change it. I know Mayers was in for Bollig, honestly not that big of a difference, an improvement for sure because of who he replaced... but this is two games in a row in which we've won the face-offs by a sizable margin (by 8 vs. St. Louis, by 12 vs. Dallas). Subtle changes are ok, radical changes I'm not in favor of.

You guys can bury your head in the sand if you want. I'm estatic about the start for the Hawks but there is nothing wrong with evaluating their weaknesses too. The fact that jntg4 doesn't agree just adds validity to the argument.

The fact that that was one of your key pieces in demonstrating your point portrays a lack of validity or supporting evidence on your part. Oh, and how original!

 

[DewsSox79]

You don't think a lack of secondary scoring would be a problem? Can't rely entirely on Toews/Kane/Hossa/Sharp. While they've not been lighting up the lamp (3 of team's 17 goals between two lines), they've been playing generally good shifts and haven't been playing poorly at all. There doesn't appear to be much disconnect, besides how Shaw, Stalberg, and Bickell all are below average at passing, so there isn't that big of a reason to change it. I know Mayers was in for Bollig, honestly not that big of a difference, an improvement for sure because of who he replaced... but this is two games in a row in which we've won the face-offs by a sizable margin (by 8 vs. St. Louis, by 12 vs. Dallas). Subtle changes are ok, radical changes I'm not in favor of.



The fact that that was one of your key pieces in demonstrating your point portrays a lack of validity or supporting evidence on your part. Oh, and how original!

this.

 

[Gunzaan]

The fact that I'm even responding to a 15 year old is insane. Who the **** said anything about radical changes? My god you are a fucking Special person. Q put Mayers in tonight for a reason. HawkWriter explained those reasons and the coach listened. We weren't analyzing a major weakness, just a minor one during a winning streak.... And amazingly, Q saw it too, hence Mayers. The change was made.

It is a case of the madden effect in football.. you guys think cause you play NHL you can take stats from that and apply it. Yah, the team won faceoffs (and they did great tonight) but break it down line by line. Toews makes the team look brilliant on faceoffs. If you don't think shaws is out of position and Mayers should see more faceoffs, you are both blind. Did you see shaw in front of the net tonight? He got pushed around like a girl. He is a winger... Its the same as playing Sharp at center... Its not his natural position.

And btw, I have no idea what jntg*** was stating in his last sentence... What key point? The giant paragraph before it just proved our point... Mayers for Bolig was great and the little boy agreed that its an improvement. I think Q, with his line changes, proved our point. We, or I, wasn't looking for a lineup overhaul, but nitpicking at a few choices on the third and fourth line. Get over it.

 

[Jntg4]

The fact that I'm even responding to a 15 year old is insane. Who the **** said anything about radical changes? My god you are a fucking Special person. Q put Mayers in tonight for a reason. HawkWriter explained those reasons and the coach listened. We weren't analyzing a major weakness, just a minor one during a winning streak.... And amazingly, Q saw it too, hence Mayers. The change was made.

18 this week, not the same as being 15. And who said anything about radical changes? HawkWriter. He wanted Mayers centering (he only had 5 face-offs today, and had the lowest % on the team in that very small sample size), Shaw moved to wing, think he was the one that wanted Saad sent down too but don't care enough to go back. That's a pretty sizable change there, and its affect won't necessarily be positive. The offense has been clicking, and we had 10 shots from our 3rd and 4th lines last night, and pretty good number. Meanwhile, Mayers played just 6:49 without a shot, so did Q really listen to him? (Of course not literally.) The fact is, the bottom lines are not playing bad at all, and the face-offs have not been bad much at all either. HawkWriter's proposed lines change 33.3% of the first line, because somehow he hasn't been impressed by Saad, keeps the second line the same, changed 66.7% of the third line, and 33.3% of the fourth line, that's a third of the entire offense, even if it does help the face-offs that are honestly a non-problem at this point, you just radically changed your entire offensive corps that has been firing on all cylinders with unnecessary changes.

It is a case of the madden effect in football.. you guys think cause you play NHL you can take stats from that and apply it. Yah, the team won faceoffs (and they did great tonight) but break it down line by line. Toews makes the team look brilliant on faceoffs. If you don't think shaws is out of position and Mayers should see more faceoffs, you are both blind. Did you see shaw in front of the net tonight? He got pushed around like a girl. He is a winger... Its the same as playing Sharp at center... Its not his natural position.

Bolland, Shaw, and Kruger all above 57%

And btw, I have no idea what jntg*** was stating in his last sentence... What key point? The giant paragraph before it just proved our point... Mayers for Bolig was great and the little boy agreed that its an improvement. I think Q, with his line changes, proved our point. We, or I, wasn't looking for a lineup overhaul, but nitpicking at a few choices on the third and fourth line. Get over it.

Funny since Bollig was still in the lineup in the proposal from HawkWriter. Maybe you weren't, but in HawkWriter's proposed lineup, he was.

 

[DewsSox79]

18 this week, not the same as being 15. And who said anything about radical changes? HawkWriter. He wanted Mayers centering (he only had 5 face-offs today, and had the lowest % on the team in that very small sample size), Shaw moved to wing, think he was the one that wanted Saad sent down too but don't care enough to go back. That's a pretty sizable change there, and its affect won't necessarily be positive. The offense has been clicking, and we had 10 shots from our 3rd and 4th lines last night, and pretty good number. Meanwhile, Mayers played just 6:49 without a shot, so did Q really listen to him? (Of course not literally.) The fact is, the bottom lines are not playing bad at all, and the face-offs have not been bad much at all either. HawkWriter's proposed lines change 33.3% of the first line, because somehow he hasn't been impressed by Saad, keeps the second line the same, changed 66.7% of the third line, and 33.3% of the fourth line, that's a third of the entire offense, even if it does help the face-offs that are honestly a non-problem at this point, you just radically changed your entire offensive corps that has been firing on all cylinders with unnecessary changes.

Bolland, Shaw, and Kruger all above 57%

Funny since Bollig was still in the lineup in the proposal from HawkWriter. Maybe you weren't, but in HawkWriter's proposed lineup, he was.

damn. JNTG with the ownage!!!

 

[Gunzaan]

Haha... Ownage, haha That's okay, coach Q showed who was right when he played Mayers last night.

 

[Jntg4]

Haha... Ownage, haha That's okay, coach Q showed who was right when he played Mayers last night.

Ya, Mayers getting 5 face-offs and playing instead of Brandon fucking Bollig completely proved your point

 

[DewsSox79]

Ya, Mayers getting 5 face-offs and playing instead of Brandon fucking Bollig completely proved your point

so true. I mean its jamal fucking mayers. oh noez he took bolligs spot so hawkposter and gunzaan were so right! haha! what a joke.

 

[Jntg4]

so true. I mean its jamal fucking mayers. oh noez he took bolligs spot so hawkposter and gunzaan were so right! haha! what a joke.

It won't let me rep any of your posts anymore, but he is using such an insignificant one-night thing in which he barely even took any face-offs to claim he was right. I can't believe he thinks that means anything, and I'm the one that is supposed to be ignorant here. :shrug: :lol:

 

[DewsSox79]

It won't let me rep any of your posts anymore, but he is using such an insignificant one-night thing in which he barely even took any face-offs to claim he was right. I can't believe he thinks that means anything, and I'm the one that is supposed to be ignorant here. :shrug: :lol:

yeah this whole rep (no thanks) thing sucks ass. Its like 48 hours before you can rep someone