• HawkIPA

    So now it’s Cumiskey. I’m okay with the move. I don’t think you can pin Rundblad’s mistakes in Game 1 solely on rust. He’s always been a liability in his own end. Cumiskey may well not be an improvement, but it’ll be hard to be worse, and his speed at least should mitigate some mistakes. Q needs to play Timonen more to reduce the risks.

    But that leaves the question, who’s next if Cumiskey can’t cut it? Do the Hawks stick with him? Back to Rundblad? Insert Pokka or Svedberg? Does Nordstrom start playing D? Questions I hope won’t need to be asked after the game tonight.

    • Jim

      I like the idea. Cumiskey can be just as bad as Runblad, but there exists at least the possibility he will be better. I think the alternative is to let Timomen play more minutes. But Q is seeing something in Kimmo that he doesn’t like.

      • HawkIPA

        Key to Game 2 is survival. Top 4 are going to get huge minutes. If the Hawks can eke out a win, then Q gets the matchups in the UC and can shelter the bottom two more easily.

        • Jim

          I think this was always the plan. But nobody knew that Runblad would sh!t the bed so badly, in his limited minutes. Yips, no yips, prepared, unprepared, the kid Runblad got his big shot, and puked it up. This is why he wanted to be in the NHL. If you’re going to make excuses, quit and do bag skate. Plus, he got illegally cross checked in the back and the refs never called it. Turning point in the game on a B.S. no call.

    • Hags

      probably back to Rundblad and hope for the best. All they need from that 5/6 D spot is just for them not to make plays that directly result in a goal. If Cumiskey can just do that, it’s a win. I’m cautiously optimistic Cumiskey can do that.

    • HostileHawk

      My biggest concern is that Q is/has not given these inexperienced players opportunities to gain experience. They have such short leashes that the pressure is just too much. Mistakes should have been expected. Not to mention that other players have made worse mistakes that have resulted in goals throughout this playoffs, or that we traded away other defensive roster options because we couldn’t give them real looks during the season. Losing Roszival is nowhere near a disaster. He was decent at best, and a liability at worst when out of position, getting out-skated, or taking bad penalties. He never should have been the #5 choice heading into the playoffs. His first 2 games were god awful.

      Overall, I liked some of Cumiskey’s upsides during his limited looks over the season, but giving Rundblad another shot seemed like the wiser choice here. Give him a game to get his game legs back.

      • rhodes

        I think this is a valid criticism of Q. As the playoffs approached he went all in on Rozsival. In retrospect, it seems it would have been wise to find opportunities to get Rundblad/Cumiskey some game minutes while resting Rozsival/Timonen a bit. He’s had Rundblad and Cumiskey on the shelf for a long time. It’s a lot to ask for them to come into a WCF series game and not expect a few yips.

  • Andrew Heitman

    Remember the narrative about Crawfords glove hand? The depth narrative feels like that…

    • HawkIPA

      Yeah. I think a win and a tight defensive game will quiet that.

      • Andrew Heitman

        It sounds like the media is hungry for a narrative in this series- so they are creating hysteria.
        I’ll help:
        RECALL RAANTA!!
        BENCH TOEWS!!!!
        TRADE KANE FOR PRONGER OR SOME SHIT!!!

    • Jim

      What about how are the Hawks going to solve Ryan Kesler?
      or How are the Hawks going to overcome the loss of Roszival?

      • Andrew Heitman

        Are the Hawks too old for the playoffs?

        Can Q match Boudreaus genius?

        Can the Hawks handle being out hit?

        • HawkIPA

          The “hits” narrative always drives me crazy. Remember the Blues series last year? If we see the Hawks close to the Ducks in hits, they’re going to be down 0-2.

          • Blues last year, Bruins/Kings in 2013, etc. Hawks have historically been able to handle physical teams…or at least not have that physicality be the reason for losing a series to a particular team. If they do happen to somehow lose this series, it won’t solely be due to being out-hit/out-muscled by the Ducks.

          • rhodes

            Me, too. Usually, if a team is out hitting another, it also means they’re losing the possession battle.

  • Sopel the catfish

    I will repeat it again as Q apparently hasn’t yet read all of my coaching advise, but the rock solid no-fail solution to the PP is to take a coincidental penalty immediately so it becomes a 4 on 4. Easiest way would be to just put out 6 skaters for the ensuing PP faceoff, take the too many men penalty and the player of your choice goes to the box. Then goals.

    • rhodes

      This is one of the great mysteries in life. I’ll never understand how the Hawks–in the same game–can be so dominant at even strength and somehow consistently struggle on the PP. Last game was a good example.

      My advice to Q is to start declining penalties.

  • Pablo
  • Brewblaz

    There’s only one real major problem, and that’s the # 5 and # 6 defensemen. The Hawks are just oh so slightly less of a team because of this one issue. Rundland was basically responsible for the 1st 2 goals, that was the game.

  • Peter Turner

    Screw that, we need a defenceman who’s big, strong, able and willing to block pucks with super reflexes and have some playoff experience. Only one guy on the bench that fits that bill and he’s the backup goalie.