TDGT 12/28 Blackhawks (27-7-6) @ Blues (24-7-5) 7:00PM CSN

[Chief Walking Stick]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MassHavoc" data-cid="217862" data-time="1388290898">
<div>


I hate the shootout</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Amen.</p>

 

[Shantz My Pants]

While Toews should of been awarded a PS, the game honestly shouldn't of gotten to the point of OT.


I'll take the point, but I'd rather have the two from regulation.

 

[mikita's helmet]

The Blues have 6 of 6 points in the first 3 games against the Hawks and should have 1, 2 at the most.


Hawks have 2 of 6 and should have at least 5, possibly 6.


That's at least an additional 7 to 9 point swing the Hawks should have on the Blues.


...and they've got to stop losing leads and losing games late in the 3rd or OT/SO against the Blues.


Not gcod.

 

[Variable]

I'll start to pay attention to the Blues when they make it past the first round. Meanwhile, I throw out every game the Hawks play against them. A close game like this one was throughout the majority of was the best thing that could've happened, regardless of who won.</p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Variable" data-cid="217888" data-time="1388359031">
<div>


I'll start to pay attention to the Blues when they make it past the first round. Meanwhile, I throw out every game the Hawks play against them. A close game like this one was throughout the majority of was the best thing that could've happened, regardless of who won.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


And no injuries!</p>

 

[Variable]

Exactly. That's why I'm glad it was a close game. It's already dangerous just playing the Blues, but if the Hawks were to have gotten up 3 goals or more, the risk goes up even more.</p>

 

[mikita's helmet]

Losing the lead at the end of the 3rd period twice is not a good thing, and losing a game at the end of the third period is worse. It's 4 points we should have had and could affect our fininish in the division at the end of the season.

 

[Variable]

Whether the Hawks first or second in the division, does it really matter? </p>

 

[mikita's helmet]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Variable" data-cid="217907" data-time="1388372309">


Whether the Hawks first or second in the division, does it really matter?
</p></blockquote>
Of course not V, you're always right. Wait, we could win the division and if the Western Division qualifies 5 teams for the playoffs we could end up flying out to Vancouver or Phoenix for the 1st round, instead of being a 2nd seed and playing Minnesota or Nashville locally. Of course, we'd beat any West Coast team in 4 or 5 games, so we wouldn't have to fly out to the coast a second time. So close games where we give away points could be good for us if we end up 2nd and don't have to travel as much. Still I'd rather have home ice throughout the playoffs, especially the Division finals, which may end up being the Hawks most difficult series. Regardless, I'll just wait for your response so you can point out my errors and provide me the correct answers in your response. I wait with bated breath.

 

[Variable]

It's not even a matter of being "right" or "wrong", as this isn't a black and white discussion, especially with how unpredictable the playoffs are. It's just...do you really think with the Hawks, being as good as they are on the road, that not having  home ice for maybe one series is what will decide their fate or have that big a negative impact on them? I don't. Not having home ice is at the bottom of the (short) list of what would come into play for me that would give me reason to worry about the Hawks in the playoffs.</p>

 

[puckjim]

There are no positives from that game.  The Blackhawks choked away the additional point and gave it to the Blues.</p>


 </p>


A regulation win would have put the Blues nine points back. Even if they won their four games in-hand, they still wouldn't be able to catch the Blackhawks.</p>


 </p>


A mostly psychological edge, but since the Blues won again last night, the lead over them is only four points.</p>


 </p>


Pissing away points the way they did is unacceptable.  Hopefully their asses are quite red this evening.</p>

 

[R K]

LOL!</p>

 

[R K]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Mikita's Helmet" data-cid="217909" data-time="1388373630">
<div>


Of course not V, you're always right. Wait, we could win the division and if the Western Division qualifies 5 teams for the playoffs we could end up flying out to Vancouver or Phoenix for the 1st round, instead of being a 2nd seed and playing Minnesota or Nashville locally. Of course, we'd beat any West Coast team in 4 or 5 games, so we wouldn't have to fly out to the coast a second time. So close games where we give away points could be good for us if we end up 2nd and don't have to travel as much. Still I'd rather have home ice throughout the playoffs, especially the Division finals, which may end up being the Hawks most difficult series. Regardless, I'll just wait for your response so you can point out my errors and provide me the correct answers in your response. I wait with bated breath.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


 </p>


Preds are going to win!</p>

 

[mikita's helmet]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="puckjim" data-cid="217922" data-time="1388411327">
<div>


There are no positives from that game.  The Blackhawks choked away the additional point and gave it to the Blues.</p>


 </p>


A regulation win would have put the Blues nine points back. Even if they won their four games in-hand, they still wouldn't be able to catch the Blackhawks.</p>


 </p>


A mostly psychological edge, but since the Blues won again last night, the lead over them is only four points.</p>


 </p>


Pissing away points the way they did is unacceptable.  Hopefully their asses are quite red this evening.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Agreed. </p>


 </p>


The Blues should have 1 or 2 points of 6 in their 3 games vs the Hawks.  They have 6.</p>


 </p>


Hawks should have 5 or 6 points of 6 in their 3 games vs. the Blues.  They have 2. </p>


 </p>


That's an additional 7 to 9 point lead over the Blues the Hawks have squandered. </p>


 </p>


If we play the Blues in the division finals I want a home ice advantage (just as I want against any other team).</p>


 </p>


**** close games that we lose the lead on.  They don't create character, they lessen our lead in the division.</p>

 

[puckjim]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Mikita's Helmet" data-cid="217934" data-time="1388421727">
<div>


Agreed. </p>


 </p>


The Blues should have 1 or 2 points of 6 in their 3 games vs the Hawks.  They have 6.</p>


 </p>


Hawks should have 5 or 6 points of 6 in their 3 games vs. the Blues.  They have 2. </p>


 </p>


That's an additional 7 to 9 point lead over the Blues the Hawks have squandered. </p>


 </p>


If we play the Blues in the division finals I want a home ice advantage (just as I want against any other team).</p>


 </p>


**** close games that we lose the lead on.  They don't create character, they lessen our lead in the division.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


Yup.  And the back-to-back games thing is no excuse, as the Blackhawks are generally good in game two.</p>


 </p>


It was a choke-job....And it was bullshit.</p>

 

[Forklift]

Hjalmarsson takes an atypical (for him) penalty, then Seabrook screws up two clearing attempts, something he never does.</p>


 </p>


A lot went wrong in this game for the Hawks aside form the tying goal, but nothing that is indicative of any pattern. Hell, last goal notwithstanding, the PK looked as balls-out as it did last year, forcing the puck to the walls and being more aggressive.</p>


 </p>


Bottom line is, they coughed up a point in the middle of the season. It happens.</p>

 

[The Count Dante]

With a neutral hat on, it was one of the most entertaining games I have seen certainly this season.</p>

 

[PatrickSharpRules]

Man, it wasn't that bad guys. We lost in a shootout and are 20 games over .500 41 games into the season.</p>

 

[R K]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Forklift" data-cid="217969" data-time="1388429857">
<div>


Hjalmarsson takes an atypical (for him) penalty, then Seabrook screws up two clearing attempts, something he never does.</p>


 </p>


A lot went wrong in this game for the Hawks aside form the tying goal, but nothing that is indicative of any pattern. Hell, last goal notwithstanding, the PK looked as balls-out as it did last year, forcing the puck to the walls and being more aggressive.</p>


 </p>


Bottom line is, they coughed up a point in the middle of the season. It happens.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


 </p>


Ding Ding....  It was not that bad.  Anyone that says it's unacceptable is a dumb ass.</p>

 

[R K]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Mikita's Helmet" data-cid="217934" data-time="1388421727">
<div>


Agreed. </p>


 </p>


The Blues should have 1 or 2 points of 6 in their 3 games vs the Hawks.  They have 6.</p>


 </p>


Hawks should have 5 or 6 points of 6 in their 3 games vs. the Blues.  They have 2. </p>


 </p>


That's an additional 7 to 9 point lead over the Blues the Hawks have squandered. </p>


 </p>


If we play the Blues in the division finals I want a home ice advantage (just as I want against any other team).</p>


 </p>


**** close games that we lose the lead on.  They don't create character, they lessen our lead in the division.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


No such thing as a shoot out in the playoffs.  It's a long season.  Games like this will happen.  Unfortunate it was the Blues but look at their Home record.  They don't just lie down and our guys CLEARLY started losing their legs in the 3rd. </p>


 </p>


With the shortened bench, 4 players on our side getting 12 minutes or less, it was expected.  So in that case, with the shortened bench the back to back most definitely played a factor.</p>