"There's no way he can stop this one..." (Photo by Rich Lam/Getty Images)

Blackhawks 2 Canucks 3: Not the Outcome They Deserved


Before I delve into the game, I have to address this because I think there’s a bigger issue at hand here. Regarding the Stalberg non-call. I understand that the refs put the whistles away and wanted to let the teams play. I’m all for that, I think its better for the game, especially in OT. But that should only be when the penalties are marginal. A blatant, desperate hook on a breakaway isn’t something the officials should let the teams just play through. That call has to be made.

The big issue here, I think, and the reason I think the refs didn’t call the hook, is this notion that the refs have to be “fair” and compensate the other team for their bad/missed calls. While I understand the logic there: it gives a degree of equilibrium to the game, it puts the game in the hands of the officials, who can ultimately determine the fate of a hockey game by making or refusing to make a call to make up for an earlier mistake. I get it, referees are human, they’re going to make mistakes. But when those mistakes (the call against Ballard, missed against the Blackhawks) compound and lead to bigger mistakes (the Stalberg non-call) and possibly cost a team a hockey game, just because the officials we’re trying to be “fair”, then it becomes a problem. Am I crazy or do I have a point here? I’d like to hear your guys’ thoughts on it.

Anyways, onwards and upwards.

Condensed version: Canucks were better in the first, Hawks dominated in the second, they split the third, Hawks could not win a faceoff to save their life, goaltending was insane on both sides, Sedins ruined our night.

The Hawks probably didn’t get the outcome they deserved and certainly not the one they wanted. They really deserved the two points. They were the better team. Were it not for the Schneider Sideshow (say that five times fast) this game likely could have be over in the second period.

At the end of the day the Hawks will probably take the road point against a tough conference opponent. The bad news is both Detroit and Nashville won, with Detroit seizing a 3-1 victory over the Flames and the Preds having a 4-goal third period to rally against the Wild. Rough night for the Hawks.

Some concluding thoughts:

- Viktor Stalberg had a great game. I spent some time listening to the Team 1040 after the game (always like to hear what they have to say after Hawk-Nuck games) and they were raving about Stalberg and commented on how he’s the complete package: size, speed and skill. Of course they weren’t surprised that Toronto traded him away, like they seem to do with every talented player they get. Anyways, great game for Viking. Looking forward to seeing more of it.

- Corey…. where did that come from? Corey Crawford, out of nowhere, decided to go all “last year” on us and had a brilliant game, finishing with a .909 save percentage, despite allowing 3 goals. He made some huge stops and brought back some pleasant memories from last year’s playoff series. The question is: is this the Crow we can expect the rest of the way? We will find out over the coming weeks.

- Brendan Morrison had an okay game. He started out bad, got better, and then stayed pretty mediocre the rest of the way. He showed flashes of his upside: he sees the ice well, he can find open ice and make good passes, can play the cycle game, not bad on defense. My only issue (no surprise) is that  his speed is lacking, which will affect the second line’s transition game. Also I’d like to see him win more battles down low and along the boards, come up with loose pucks and create some space for Hossa and Sharp. To what degree he’ll be able to do that is yet to be determined. But overall, not a bad first game. He didn’t look too out of place and given some time to form chemistry with 10 and 81, I think he could work out.

- I think Andrew Shaw just got hit again.

- I thought Duncan Keith, despite his minus-2 rating, had a very, very strong game. His ability to read and anticipate plays was on full display as he broke up a number of passes that could have resulted in high quality scoring chances and rushes. Brent Seabrook too had a solid game, as he and Keith did some fine work against the Twins. The Hawks need these two at the top of their games if they have any chance of surviving this road trip.

- Speaking of which, want to know what John Scott’s ice time was? 5:21. Meanwhile Keith played 30:22, Seabrook 27:42 and Leddy 24:42. Quenneville can you please explain your logic of forcing this many minutes on your defenseman at the beginning of a gruelling 9 game road trip? For “toughness”? There was almost zero animosity in this game. Just two, competitive teams trying to get 2 points. I sure hope you learned your lesson and you keep that gorilla in the press box the rest of the way.

- Keith Ballard is an overpayed pile of uselessness. He thinks hockey only consists of hipchecking, turning pucks over and whacking your own goalie in the head. I find it absolutely hysterical that Canucks fans think he has any kind of trade value.

Thanks for reading.

Tags: Brent Seabrook Chicago Blackhawks Corey Crawford Duncan Keith John Scott Vancouver Canucks Viktor Stalberg

  • swords

    Don’t forget that if Burrows got a boarding whoever sent Kesler heading
    to the boards shoulda got one too.
    The Ballard penalty was an elbowing
    Penalty and Crawford got away with the
    trip and he was as lucky as Schneider.
    Schneider was busier though. Hawks had lotsa chances and all the power plays in the last two games against Vancouver. So they made their own bed
    and that deserves the one point not two.

  • CanucksFORlife

    The drivel you type about a bunch of shitty players is priceless the bottom line te hawks came up short as they will and will end up in eighth place to face a 4 and out series with Detroit enjoy the misery

    • CodyPugh

      @CanucksFORlife This is why the Canucks are hated

    • CodyPugh

      @CanucksFORlife Not hard to see why the Canucks are hated. You Canucks fans go out of your way to go on to another team’s fansite and troll. If only your team was as good at winning games as its fans are at pissing people off, your team would have a Cup by now.

      • CanucksFORlife

        If my team spent as many years in the gutter as the hawks did we would have cup by now. But we didn’t so I’ll sit back and wait for the time will come and the Canucks will rule the NHL. Death to the Blackhawks.@CodyPugh

        • CodyPugh

          @CanucksFORlife Ya because a lot of teams win Cups when they’re in the gutter. That has to be the stupidest comeback in the history of really studip comebacks. And obviously it would come from a Canucks fans. How many cop cars did you burn last June? 2? 3? I’m eager to know.

        • CodyPugh

          @CanucksFORlife Ya because a lot of teams win Cups when they’re in the gutter… That has to be the stupidest comeback in the history of really stupid comebacks. And obviously it came from a Canucks fans. How many cop cars did you burn last June? 2? 3? I’m eager to know.

        • CanucksFORlife

          Only young punks burn vehicles probably just like you . Good luck against the oilers tomorrow your team may stand a chance, although I think they got crushed last time wasn’t the score 9 to 2 yeah good luck shit gulls @CodyPugh

        • CodyPugh

          I’m @CanucksFORlife I’m sorry but I can’t take anything you say seriously. That previous comment you made was so unbelievable stupid that anything you say from here on out is totally inadmissible. Thanks for reading and have yourself a good night.

        • CanucksFORlife

          I can’t wait to see the excuses you come up with after the oilers game. What you guys couldn’t stop one man. Oh they were really good short handed hahaha. Just type the truth the hawks sucked in every aspect don’t sugar coat anything. Let’s see some real reporting

      • swords

        @CodyPugh @CanucksFORlife

  • swords

    I was commenting on what you wrote.
    I didn’t say anything that wasn’t true
    AND I wasn’t certainly wasn’t trolling to trash talk the Blackhawks. I was at the game. You didn’t even comment to back up why you think my commentary is wrong other than I didn’t say “great game by Chicago”. You just went off.
    Facts? Chicago didn’t get er done for the second point and in the last two minutes you can’t tell me that Chicago did not commit any penalties? It’s not anyone’s fault but the Hawks that they lost. Unless blog is part fiction? If it is – trash talk away.

    • swords

      excuse two minutes and substitute games for minutes pkaz

    • CodyPugh

      @swords I apologize. I didn’t mean to direct hostility towards you or your comments. I do appreciate them. I was directing my comments towards that imbecile. You had some good points and I would like to discuss them.

      First, regarding the late boarding call against Kesler. That board doesn’t happen if the penalty shot is called. And it likely wasn’t called as a reparation for not calling the hook on the breakaway. So that really shouldn’t count as a call the refs “missed”. The preceeding circumstances help explain why the call wasn’t made.

      Ballard penalty wasn’t a penalty. That’s a bad call by the refs. And yes, Chicago has to cash in when they get opportunities, but I still don’t think thats justification for the refs purposely making or not making calls just to be “fair” and compensate the other team. And this isn’t just with the Blackhawks, I was talking in general. If an official makes an error fine. Admit it and leave it at that. Don’t multiply the errors by making more bad calls/non-calls to make up for it. That’s how officiating in the NHL has received such a bad reputation.

      The Burrows penalty was a penalty. That’s boarding 100%. Wasn’t vicious boarding, but it was boarding.

      I don’t remember the “Crawford trip” you’re referring to. And to be honest, I don’t remember a whole of penalties that the refs didn’t call. There were a few, but they went both ways.

      I admit at the end of the day the Hawks didn’t get it done, regardless of officiating. But, and we can agree to disagree here. I believe the Hawks were the better team throughout most of the hockey game. The Hawks had far more high quality scoring chances and as you said, Schneider was busier. In fact, he was probably the big reason they won the hockey game. Personally I thought they deserved the two points more so than the Canucks, who played a good game, but weren’t quite as good as the other team and needed their goalie to bail them out, which he did, and withstood the attack long enough to win.

      Thanks for commenting. I appreciate the unput