SCF-6/17 Game 3: Blackhawks (1) vs Bruins (1) NBCS 7PM CST.

[Ton]

How many shots came from inside the slot in game three? Maybe four? That's something they are going to need to figure out. Boston clogged up the house like it was a god damn clown car. They gotta get some lanes to open up, too many shots were from the outside. One and done "chances" if you even want to call them that.</p>

 

[Ashor-redtribe]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Ton DeFrancesco" data-cid="201536" data-time="1371576930">
<div>


How many shots came from inside the slot in game three? Maybe four? That's something they are going to need to figure out. Boston clogged up the house like it was a god damn clown car. They gotta get some lanes to open up, too many shots were from the outside. One and done "chances" if you even want to call them that.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


You are not going to beat Tukka from the side. The goals he allowed, he was screened.  </p>

 

[PatrickShart]

The only change I would like to see the Hawks when it comes to shooting..is shooting more off the pass.</p>


 </p>


It may mean less "throwing everything to the net" - but would give a better chance of shots getting through.  Even if it's shorter passes</p>


 </p>


Also...didn't understand how Kaspars Daugavins elbow and leaving feet to Shaw's head...was called a "rough"</p>

 

[Pez68]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Ton DeFrancesco" data-cid="201536" data-time="1371576930">
<div>


How many shots came from inside the slot in game three? Maybe four? That's something they are going to need to figure out. Boston clogged up the house like it was a god damn clown car. They gotta get some lanes to open up, too many shots were from the outside. One and done "chances" if you even want to call them that.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


Ask, and ye shall receive:</p>


 </p>

</p>

 

[bookjones]

Re the unexpected Hawks practice for today that was announced last night after the game. As Willy Wonka would say, "Strike that, reverse it."</p>


 </p>


 </p>

</p>

 

[Ton]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="pmxclland" data-cid="201541" data-time="1371577685">
<div>


The only change I would like to see the Hawks when it comes to shooting..is shooting more off the pass.</p>


 </p>


It may mean less "throwing everything to the net" - but would give a better chance of shots getting through.  Even if it's shorter passes</p>


 </p>


Also...didn't understand how Kaspars Daugavins elbow and leaving feet to Shaw's head...was called a "rough"</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


There were a couple missed opportunities I noticed with that as well.</p>

 

[Ton]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Pez68" data-cid="201542" data-time="1371577951">
<div>


Ask, and ye shall receive:</p>


 </p>

</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


So two shots in what amounts to the high slot, and another one right in the middle slot.</p>


 </p>


I gave them too much credit. 7 or 8 of those look like they were shot with their asses on the boards. Then of course the cluster of shots on the LW outside the circle... was that really Q's game plan? To take shots off the LW boards? Or poor execution?</p>


 </p>


Look at Boston's selection...  Craw had a helluva workload compared to Rask. Almost 20 of the Bruins shots came within 10-15 feet of our net. The Hawks had maybe 5 or 6... and that's even being generous.</p>

 

[LordKOTL]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Pez68" data-cid="201542" data-time="1371577951">
<div>


Ask, and ye shall receive:</p>


 </p>

</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


What does this tell us?</p>


 </p>


Shots off the left boards are not going to go in.</p>


We have far too few netmouth chances.</p>


We have far too few shots from the circles</p>


We're trying to force the perfect shots from the perfect real estate rathern that picking up the trash.</p>


 </p>


Seems simple enough. </p>

 

[PatrickShart]

How many shots did the Hawks take in that area that were blocked - that didn't even count as shots?</p>


 </p>


It's not a matter of being simple, not trying, or them "wanting it more".  They did a good job, are a good team, and chances aren't easy to come by</p>

 

[bookjones]

</p>

 

[BigPete]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rex" data-cid="201520" data-time="1371571965">
<div>


I'm aware</p>


 </p>


can we fucking put Toews and Kane together now?</p>


 </p>


Most disturbing fact I heard about last night (and hope it's not true) Chara was in the locker room for over four minutes during the game, Toews didn't get a single shift. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


 </p>


Our coach RULES!  Q for president!  Q is the greatest coach ever, haven't you seen his record?!?!? </p>


 </p>


Q can suck my big fat dick and GTFO of Chicago this summer.  He was given a massively talented team in his first two years and won a cup with a bunch of young, hard nosed players.  This year he was given a (supposedly) more talented team, had a great regular season, and has struggled in many ways in every series this post season.  This team wins in spite of him and his assistant coaches.  The PP blows and we can't score more than two goals yet we have seven of the top 100 players in the league and a productive supporting cast (at least they were prior to this round). </p>


 </p>


It's really fucking simple Q:</p>


Bickell - Toews - Kane</p>


Saad - Sharp - Hossa</p>


Shaw - Bolland - Stahlberg</p>


Kruger - Handzus - Frolik</p>


 </p>


AND DON'T CHANGE THEM EVERY TWO MINUTES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</p>

 

[the canadian dream]

I dont think its was coaching last night but more of execution and poor decisions on the ice. Q can't be faulted for 3 dumb penalties by Bolland...missing the net in the slot.....no shots on the powerplay..etc etc. I didn't like Q's lines for much of the night either but execution on chances are a players thing. Chances don't come often for either team (well maybe in the first period of game 2 they did for the Hawks). Boston executed on theirs last night the Hawks didn't. Pretty much the story of the night if not a lot of the series so far.</p>

 

[Tater]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="BigPete" data-cid="201556" data-time="1371584943">
<div>


Our coach RULES!  Q for president!  Q is the greatest coach ever, haven't you seen his record?!?!? </p>


 </p>


Q can suck my big fat dick and GTFO of Chicago this summer.  He was given a massively talented team in his first two years and won a cup with a bunch of young, hard nosed players.  This year he was given a (supposedly) more talented team, had a great regular season, and has struggled in many ways in every series this post season.  This team wins in spite of him and his assistant coaches.  The PP blows and we can't score more than two goals yet we have seven of the top 100 players in the league and a productive supporting cast (at least they were prior to this round). </p>


 </p>


It's really fucking simple Q:</p>


Bickell - Toews - Kane</p>


Saad - Sharp - Hossa</p>


Shaw - Bolland - Stahlberg</p>


Kruger - Handzus - Frolik</p>


 </p>


AND DON'T CHANGE THEM EVERY TWO MINUTES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


DING!!!!!</p>

 

[The Count Dante]

I can certainly understand changing lines up when you are away and have the last change to try throw off the opposing coach. I can also understand when you are at home and want to stack your lines and such.</p>


 </p>


But Q, when the chips are down, shuffles his lines faster than a Vegas dealer. I would be willing to guess that not every person has played with every other player on every line.</p>


 </p>


Q has come up with some brilliant lines (the 1c line as friends and I called with Ladd, Bolland, Havlat comes to mind, putting a marquee player on a "3rd").</p>


 </p>


But how can a player try to work with differing playstyles when he doesnt even get 2 shifts with the linemates?</p>


 </p>


I realize that Q has coached about a 1000 more NHL games than I have but it seems common sense to me. Synergy takes time. It is also a clear tell when you know Q is behind the eight-ball because he just changes and changes and changes. When he is losing, there doesnt seem to be any rhyme or reason.</p>

 

[Ashor-redtribe]

Look, if you can't score on a PP, your chances of winning the cup are 0. Its as simple as that, Boston is dismal on the PP, but they have found a way to score on whats suppose to be the best PK unit in the NHL.</p>

 

[Ashor-redtribe]

 If they don't win the Cup, I would like to see other possiblities as the head coach, This team is to talented to be coached like this. I like Q but, he is easily rattled when he is outcoached. I mean how the fuck laughs when asked about the power play during coaches interview during the game....that made me so mad. " we need to score, hahahahahahaha"</p>

 

[R K]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Ashor-redtribe" data-cid="201567" data-time="1371588159">
<div>


Look, if you can't score on a PP, your chances of winning the cup are 0. Its as simple as that, Boston is dismal on the PP, but they have found a way to score on whats suppose to be the best PK unit in the NHL.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


 </p>


They have one goal and another on the end of a 5 on 3.  Give me a break. </p>


 </p>


I do like the -52 though that's fucking funny!</p>

 

[R K]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Ashor-redtribe" data-cid="201568" data-time="1371588370">
<div>


 If they don't win the Cup, I would like to see other possiblities as the head coach, This team is to talented to be coached like this. I like Q but, he is easily rattled when he is outcoached. I mean how the fuck laughs when asked about the power play during coaches interview during the game....that made me so mad. " we need to score, hahahahahahaha"</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


No way are they firing Q.  He has them 3 games from the Cup.  Best record in the NHL.  Conference Champs.  Not happening. </p>

 

[Ashor-redtribe]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="R K" data-cid="201569" data-time="1371588474">
<div>


They have one goal and another on the end of a 5 on 3.  Give me a break. </p>


 </p>


I do like the -52 though that's fucking funny!</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


thats two more then us that have made a difference in the game, right? and your wrong the second one came when bolland stepped on the ice, but to give you credit, he did not get a chance to get in the picture. BUT regardless, I will not give you a break when this shit hole PP unit can't get it toghter for the past two fucken years...NO EXCUSE!  BUt keep focusing on the -52 that some fucken idiots have nothing better to do, other then follow the leader game.</p>

 

[BigPete]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="The Canadian Dreamalchuk" data-cid="201560" data-time="1371587027">
<div>


I dont think its was coaching last night but more of execution and poor decisions on the ice. Q can't be faulted for 3 dumb penalties by Bolland...missing the net in the slot.....no shots on the powerplay..etc etc. I didn't like Q's lines for much of the night either but execution on chances are a players thing. Chances don't come often for either team (well maybe in the first period of game 2 they did for the Hawks). Boston executed on theirs last night the Hawks didn't. Pretty much the story of the night if not a lot of the series so far.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


 </p>


Does anyone have the energy to track Q's line changes during each game?  That would be extremely telling how many times he iced different combos compared to the starting lineup card.  I bet it is way higher than anyone else in the league. </p>