Let's Go Blues

Hawks lost the game on missing those 2 wide open nets. Crawford's soft goal to open the game didn't help and I also feel the game tying goal was soft too. The 3rd goal was from Cumiskey not covering and again shows a problem with our 3rd line d-pair. At least Van Riemsdyk was able to play so Rundblad could sit out. Bishop made a lot of great saves and overall has been much better than Crawford this series - very little room for error in the SCF.

Pretty cool to read about a StL-born goalie drafted by the Blues putting in "heroic" performances in the SCF...for a team that didn't exist until I was a teenager.

gaijin wrote:

APOD wrote:Great game Chicago would have had that if not for those missed EN shots.I love how Saad just decides to punch Bish in the face, I don’t even think Kerfuffle can argue that it wasn't deliberate. If Tampa can shut down the hawks in game 4 I think that just might knock the wind out of the hawks for a game 5 win and the cup.

Bish still looks slow, wondering if he still gets the nod for game 4.

Yeah, he definitely made no effort whatsoever to avoid contact with Bishop's head. On the other hand, Bishop may have embellished just a wee little bit.

Ummm... he wasn't laying on the ice due to the head shot. He got whacked in the nuts by the other Hawks player when he was facedown after the head shot.

Kerfuffle wrote:Hawks lost the game on missing those 2 wide open nets. Crawford's soft goal to open the game didn't help and I also feel the game tying goal was soft too. The 3rd goal was from Cumiskey not covering and again shows a problem with our 3rd line d-pair. At least Van Riemsdyk was able to play so Rundblad could sit out. Bishop made a lot of great saves and overall has been much better than Crawford this series - very little room for error in the SCF.

That and the Lightning kept blocking shots all night. Their foot speed is pretty impressive too. There was more than one time last night I saw a play developing and thought to myself "oh crap here comes another odd man rush" and one way or another the Lightning canceled out the Blackhawks rushes.

Exhibit A on the speed of the game Hitch. You watching? You better be.

And Cumiskey covered he just gave the guy way too much of a cushion. Too conservative and cautious on that play. Can't blame the guy. He's probably out there with a death grip on his stick repeating "just don't f*ck up" over and over in his head...

That first goal by Bishop was awful. He had that shot in his glove he just missed it. Crawford didn't give up any GLARING goals. I thought it was pretty even.

WaukeeBlues wrote:That and the Lightning kept blocking shots all night. Their foot speed is pretty impressive too. There was more than one time last night I saw a play developing and thought to myself "oh crap here comes another odd man rush" and one way or another the Lightning canceled out the Blackhawks rushes.

Exhibit A on the speed of the game Hitch. You watching? You better be.

This reminded me of another idiotic quote by Pierre MacGuire. At one point in the third, the Triplets are on the ice for Tampa (Tyler Johnson, Palat and Kucherov) and MacGuire says this is dangerous for Tampa with the Triplets on the ice, because they have "no checking presence."

Ummm, dumbass. Tyler Johnson created goals throughout the playoffs off of his own back-checking. One of the PK units for Tampa - Tyler Johnson and Kucherov. Palat also kills penalties.

But the Triplets have no checking presence. Moron.

theohall wrote:

WaukeeBlues wrote:That and the Lightning kept blocking shots all night. Their foot speed is pretty impressive too. There was more than one time last night I saw a play developing and thought to myself "oh crap here comes another odd man rush" and one way or another the Lightning canceled out the Blackhawks rushes.

Exhibit A on the speed of the game Hitch. You watching? You better be.

This reminded me of another idiotic quote by Pierre MacGuire. At one point in the third, the Triplets are on the ice for Tampa (Tyler Johnson, Palat and Kucherov) and MacGuire says this is dangerous for Tampa with the Triplets on the ice, because they have "no checking presence."

Ummm, dumbass. Tyler Johnson created goals throughout the playoffs off of his own back-checking. One of the PK units for Tampa - Tyler Johnson and Kucherov. Palat also kills penalties.

But the Triplets have no checking presence. Moron.

But hey, he can tell you where everyone played their junior or college hockey.

#EmmyWinningAnalyst

theohall wrote:

WaukeeBlues wrote:That and the Lightning kept blocking shots all night. Their foot speed is pretty impressive too. There was more than one time last night I saw a play developing and thought to myself "oh crap here comes another odd man rush" and one way or another the Lightning canceled out the Blackhawks rushes.

Exhibit A on the speed of the game Hitch. You watching? You better be.

This reminded me of another idiotic quote by Pierre MacGuire. At one point in the third, the Triplets are on the ice for Tampa (Tyler Johnson, Palat and Kucherov) and MacGuire says this is dangerous for Tampa with the Triplets on the ice, because they have "no checking presence."

Ummm, dumbass. Tyler Johnson created goals throughout the playoffs off of his own back-checking. One of the PK units for Tampa - Tyler Johnson and Kucherov. Palat also kills penalties.

But the Triplets have no checking presence. Moron.

Awesome stuff man. I can not stand that joke of an analyst. So annoying, thinks he knows everything.

STLADOGG wrote:Awesome stuff man. I can not stand that joke of an analyst. So annoying, thinks he knows everything.

What's really sad. I'm watching the game via DVR, not live, so I'm fast forwarding when nothing is really happening and yet I still hear his nonsense.

I never understood why he has to be between the benches and comment on the mundane "yeah Doc and Eddie I'm hearing quite a bit of squawking now going back and forth between both benches - it's getting nasty now". Who cares? That happens every game.

I've been pleasantly surprised with Eddie Olczyk this series. He's had a few Blackhawks gushing moments but he's by and large been pretty fair and has been singing some Lightning praise when it's due.

Normally he makes me want to vomit whenever he's commentating on the Blackhawks.

He still makes very basic positioning plays sound like only things that all-star's do.

"LOOK AT THE STICK ON THE ICE IN THE SLOT!!!"

WaukeeBlues wrote:I've been pleasantly surprised with Eddie Olczyk this series. He's had a few Blackhawks gushing moments but he's by and large been pretty fair and has been singing some Lightning praise when it's due.

Normally he makes me want to vomit whenever he's commentating on the Blackhawks.

He still makes very basic positioning plays sound like only things that all-star's do.

"LOOK AT THE STICK ON THE ICE IN THE SLOT!!!"

Everyone we play thinks he's biased. He's an analyst and I always felt he's been fair to all opponents and does indeed analyze the game. I'd be curious to know what you consider to be a gushing moment of him saying something about the Hawks.

Kerfuffle wrote:

WaukeeBlues wrote:I've been pleasantly surprised with Eddie Olczyk this series. He's had a few Blackhawks gushing moments but he's by and large been pretty fair and has been singing some Lightning praise when it's due.

Normally he makes me want to vomit whenever he's commentating on the Blackhawks.

He still makes very basic positioning plays sound like only things that all-star's do.

"LOOK AT THE STICK ON THE ICE IN THE SLOT!!!"

Everyone we play thinks he's biased. He's an analyst and I always felt he's been fair to all opponents and does indeed analyze the game. I'd be curious to know what you consider to be a gushing moment of him saying something about the Hawks.

I love Eddie he is one of my favorites, makes you feel like your in the game his play by play is one of the best I think.

Kerfuffle wrote:

WaukeeBlues wrote:I've been pleasantly surprised with Eddie Olczyk this series. He's had a few Blackhawks gushing moments but he's by and large been pretty fair and has been singing some Lightning praise when it's due.

Normally he makes me want to vomit whenever he's commentating on the Blackhawks.

He still makes very basic positioning plays sound like only things that all-star's do.

"LOOK AT THE STICK ON THE ICE IN THE SLOT!!!"

Everyone we play thinks he's biased. He's an analyst and I always felt he's been fair to all opponents and does indeed analyze the game. I'd be curious to know what you consider to be a gushing moment of him saying something about the Hawks.

How about the playoffs last season and defending Seabrook's high hit on Backes? It was absolutely ludicrous. During a Hawks-Blues game, have you EVER heard Eddie compliment St Louis? I haven't. He is biased usually during Hawks games and more biased during games involving teams he considers rivals from his playing days. It's blatantly obvious to non-Hawks fans, because Hawks fans hear his constant praise of their team.

Yes, he has been good this series and not the overtly biased guy I usually hear. (feel free to ignore this part of the post )

theohall wrote: How about the playoffs last season and defending Seabrook's high hit on Backes? It was absolutely ludicrous. During a Hawks-Blues game, have you EVER heard Eddie compliment St Louis? I haven't. He is biased usually during Hawks games and more biased during games involving teams he considers rivals from his playing days. It's blatantly obvious to non-Hawks fans, because Hawks fans hear his constant praise of their team.

Yes, he has been good this series and not the overtly biased guy I usually hear. (feel free to ignore this part of the post )

I don't care if Eddie praises the Blues or not - that's not his job. His job is to analyze the game and I think he does a nice job of it. If you're judging him because he doesn't give pats on the back to the Blues I think that's unfair. I really don't remember what he said about the hit on Backes but I doubt he was glorifying it as something wonderful and praising Seabrook for it.

One way to ensure you have a damn good chance of winning game 4 with your backup goalie in net is to only give up 2 shots a period. Nice job on the defense, Tampa. Now let's get some goals in the 2nd, give Vasilevskiy some support, eh?

glen a richter wrote:One way to ensure you have a damn good chance of winning game 4 with your backup goalie in net is to only give up 2 shots a period. Nice job on the defense, Tampa. Now let's get some goals in the 2nd, give Vasilevskiy some support, eh?

Quenville changed all the lines tonight and it had opposite effect in 1st period - there was no chemistry with the lines and hence 2 shots

Kerfuffle wrote:

theohall wrote: How about the playoffs last season and defending Seabrook's high hit on Backes? It was absolutely ludicrous. During a Hawks-Blues game, have you EVER heard Eddie compliment St Louis? I haven't. He is biased usually during Hawks games and more biased during games involving teams he considers rivals from his playing days. It's blatantly obvious to non-Hawks fans, because Hawks fans hear his constant praise of their team.

Yes, he has been good this series and not the overtly biased guy I usually hear. (feel free to ignore this part of the post )

I don't care if Eddie praises the Blues or not - that's not his job. His job is to analyze the game and I think he does a nice job of it. If you're judging him because he doesn't give pats on the back to the Blues I think that's unfair. I really don't remember what he said about the hit on Backes but I doubt he was glorifying it as something wonderful and praising Seabrook for it.

No. Even when the Blues are beating the 'Hawks and the 'Hawks are playing like shit, he is still complimenting the 'Hawks while denigrating the team beating the 'Hawks. Only 'Hawks fans don't see this bias.

His job is to be an analyst which actually analyzes the game and comments on what's happening during the game, even when it isn't going the way he wants it to due to his bias. Unfortunately, he NEVER gets over this bias when the Blues are involved in a game. Even when the Blues are totally beating the crap out of a team, he goes out of his way to only compliment the opponent. It's horse-shit, biased, supposed analysis.

Pierre MacGuire idiotic quote of the night:

"Saad has had a great start" - with just over 8 minutes remaining in the 1st period with the Hawks being held shotless for the 1st 10 minutes.

theohall wrote:

Kerfuffle wrote:

theohall wrote: How about the playoffs last season and defending Seabrook's high hit on Backes? It was absolutely ludicrous. During a Hawks-Blues game, have you EVER heard Eddie compliment St Louis? I haven't. He is biased usually during Hawks games and more biased during games involving teams he considers rivals from his playing days. It's blatantly obvious to non-Hawks fans, because Hawks fans hear his constant praise of their team.

Yes, he has been good this series and not the overtly biased guy I usually hear. (feel free to ignore this part of the post )

I don't care if Eddie praises the Blues or not - that's not his job. His job is to analyze the game and I think he does a nice job of it. If you're judging him because he doesn't give pats on the back to the Blues I think that's unfair. I really don't remember what he said about the hit on Backes but I doubt he was glorifying it as something wonderful and praising Seabrook for it.

No. Even when the Blues are beating the 'Hawks and the 'Hawks are playing like shit, he is still complimenting the 'Hawks while denigrating the team beating the 'Hawks. Only 'Hawks fans don't see this bias.

His job is to be an analyst which actually analyzes the game and comments on what's happening during the game, even when it isn't going the way he wants it to due to his bias. Unfortunately, he NEVER gets over this bias when the Blues are involved in a game. Even when the Blues are totally beating the crap out of a team, he goes out of his way to only compliment the opponent. It's horse-shit, biased, supposed analysis.

You would need to share an example cause I don't see it.

Kerfuffle wrote:

theohall wrote:

Kerfuffle wrote:

theohall wrote: How about the playoffs last season and defending Seabrook's high hit on Backes? It was absolutely ludicrous. During a Hawks-Blues game, have you EVER heard Eddie compliment St Louis? I haven't. He is biased usually during Hawks games and more biased during games involving teams he considers rivals from his playing days. It's blatantly obvious to non-Hawks fans, because Hawks fans hear his constant praise of their team.

Yes, he has been good this series and not the overtly biased guy I usually hear. (feel free to ignore this part of the post )

I don't care if Eddie praises the Blues or not - that's not his job. His job is to analyze the game and I think he does a nice job of it. If you're judging him because he doesn't give pats on the back to the Blues I think that's unfair. I really don't remember what he said about the hit on Backes but I doubt he was glorifying it as something wonderful and praising Seabrook for it.

No. Even when the Blues are beating the 'Hawks and the 'Hawks are playing like shit, he is still complimenting the 'Hawks while denigrating the team beating the 'Hawks. Only 'Hawks fans don't see this bias.

His job is to be an analyst which actually analyzes the game and comments on what's happening during the game, even when it isn't going the way he wants it to due to his bias. Unfortunately, he NEVER gets over this bias when the Blues are involved in a game. Even when the Blues are totally beating the crap out of a team, he goes out of his way to only compliment the opponent. It's horse-shit, biased, supposed analysis.

You would need to share an example cause I don't see it.

Last year's playoffs come to mind. Those two OT wins by St Louis last year in round 1. Not one positive comment from Eddie in those two games. But go ahead and believe he isn't biased. Heck, he was blaming Backes for getting hit in the head by Seabrook as if he intentionally put his head where Seabrook had to hit him there. Even the other announcer, (it wasn't Emrick at the time), said "C'mon Eddie." I'm not the only one that heard this, and interestingly, he didn't call the next 3 games of that series after showing that insane bias. after he said that crap. Of course, he was back with the Hawks in place to win the series.

But enjoy being a blatantly Homer 'Hawks fan who can't see the truth, because OMG, it's a former Hawks player announcing. He's teh aw3sUm!