Some Day There’ll Be A Cure For Pain: Hawks 0 – Bruins 2 (B’s lead 2-1)

I’m not sure where to start this. I think the best place is to separate the optics of it from what the reality might be.

I understand what some people are seeing. Because the Bruins are bigger, their hits tend to knock Hawks to the ice, whereas the Hawks’ don’t. Because the B’s are so good defensively, even when the play is even the Hawks aren’t creating chance after chance (even though the B’s actually aren’t creating that much either). There’s this impression that it should always look like the 1st period of Game 2, but the Bruins are too good for that. The Hawks can’t get to rebounds that are there, Rask isn’t working all that hard, I can see where some people might mistake it for an ass-kicking. But it just doesn’t feel to me that’s what what we’ve witnessed here.

Let’s just get to the bullets and we’ll see if I can’t prove my point:

-If nothing else comes of this spring, at least Joel Quenneville will be exposed for what we’ve said he is for at least two years now. Great philosophy, borderline terrible implementer.

You know, on paper the idea of slotting Toews with Kruger and Frolik isn’t as asinine as it sounds. Kruger and Fro and have been the two best forwards for the Hawks this series, maybe longer. It might have even worked at home.

But on the road, it makes it far too easy on the Bruins to pick their spots for Bergeron. Claude Julien doesn’t have to send out Bergeron against Toews when he’s got those wingers (because Kruger isn’t a winger). Which is why Bergeron had his best game of the series. He had the run of it.

Now for example, if Toews had been with Bickell and Kane — y’know, the line that produced four goals in two games against the Kings — even on the road that would force Julien to counter it with Bergeron’s line. There’s no way the B’s coach would let that Hawks line get away with looking at anything else. You’d essentially be saying that we’ll take a standoff between those two units at worst, and we’ll let our depth attack your depth.

Some of this is complicated by Hossa’s injury obviously, but you get the feeling even if 81 had played this was how Q would have played it. And it’s wrong.

And Q out-thought himself before the series even started by fucking up the lines that had sealed the Kings series. He was countering moves that haven’t even been made by Julien. He put Kane back with Zus and Sharp which had already proven to not work. He got away with it in Game 1 because Saad made it work on the top line, and Q’s lucky that he’s got so many players who can make him look good (or at least erase his mistakes). But this isn’t the first time Q is running very behind his counterpart.

-It’s not just the lines. It’s tactical as well. Last year, Q didn’t drill his team to go with the soft chips behind the defense until halfway through Game 5, and by then it was too late. So it was again, as the Hawks opted for the hard ring-around when they couldn’t attack with speed. But this allows the B’s d-man on the weak side to simply send the puck back behind his own net, where the Bruins are always going to win the battle. At worst he’ll tie up with the Hawks forechecker over there, and that stalls play. The Hawks need to go off the glass where Rask can’t get it or into the same corner where they’re always carrying it.

-I find it so hilarious that everyone is in shock over what the faceoffs and power play look like. Have they not been paying attention?

-As for the PP, while Eddie O complains about not using the men down low, that would assume they can get set up. Which they can’t. And it’s the ringa-arounds that are costing them. I counted three times tonight when Leddy eschewed those and carried it in himself, got it to the corner, and had no support. There’s your problem.

They also have had some success at finding the player on the boards on the entry, but refuse to try and make something happen on the rush. They’re so determined to curl back, and get it back to the point which is exactly what the B’s PK is designed to stop. Hit that man, and get it to the net on the rush. What can it hurt?

-And yet, it just wasn’t that bad. The B’s came out with a pretty powerful punch in the beginning of the first two periods, and for the most part the Hawks weathered it. As both periods went on, the Hawks took more and more control. That is until Dave Bolland turned back into the elk turd he’s been all season.

-At some point you knew the power play would cost the Hawks a game. Here we are.

-But, it’s not as if the Hawks were helpless. As Fifth Feather pointed out, when they do break cleanly from their zone and get even a 2-on-2 or 3-on-3 going the other way, the B’s are giving their puck-carriers enough space to give the late man a ton of space. They will profit from this soon.

-If I’m not mistaken, the B’s have rung their last three goals off a post and in. The Hawks two best chances in the 3rd tonight, they missed the net. On such small margins will this series be decided.

-Hossa’s injury is a worry. That he did it taking a shot in warmup suggests a muscle problem, which probably will not clear up by Wednesday.

-The first goal….well, Bolland can’t get pickpocketed there but it was a result of being where he needed to be and supporting his d-man. It started with a blind ring around the boards from Rozie and Ben Smith floating out toward center when he needed to beat it to the faceoff circle in the Hawks zone to be above that pinching defenseman. But I’m not going to hang Smith out to dry in his first game in two months.

-When the Hawks can even get evens back to the B’s zone, there’s a lot of room to the outside. They can take more advantage of that.

-Sadly, letting Paille out of whatever cage of confusion he was in before this series is not a good idea.

I’ll probably clean up the leftover thoughts that I can’t remember right now tomorrow. But let’s be honest. The only time we’ve panicked, or at least the last time I panicked, was down a goal in the 3rd in Game 6 against Scum. We know how that turned out. Such a long way to go here.

  • Jeff Lebowski
  • Country_Bumpkin

    The Hawks being down against the B’s is much different than being down against the Wings. Boston is looking like the PT winner while the Hawks look like a four seed. Coach Q needs to be held accountable for the PP along with his execution.

    • HawkIPA

      The Hawks looked worse against the Wings. This is not over.

  • BigCSouthside

    I think this one is on Q. Heres why

    1.) Q claims the Hossa injury was a known issue prior to warmups. Ok, so why did you stick a guy in who didnt take warmups, then throw your lines in a blender? What happened on the ice reflected a coach thrown a last minute curveball, not something a coach could have prepared for. Either he is lying about when the injury happened, lying now about the injury as a gamesmanship play, or he is an idiot.

    2.) The middle of the ice is fucking fortress europe. Why are you sending Kane/Toews out there and trying to have them skate it across the blue line into three defenders that are ALWAYS there? They are great, but three large guys who know what they are doing vs 1 guy are going to win that matchup 99% of the time. Theres nothing wrong with dump and chase. Not. One. Fucking. Thing.

    3.) Below the goal line offensive setup has been seen, read, and prepared for. Because of this, the entire point of setting up shop back there is more or less negated by a guy who either A) comes in and basically ties up the puck carriers stick or B) just pins whoever brings the puck back there to the wall and waits for backup to get the puck. The result is the puck gets played along the boards and either a Bruins player is there directly, or a Bruins player is on top of whoever recieves that puck, and that person is almost NEVER in a play making position. There havnt been a lot of pucks thrown to the middle off this scheme. Time to try something different.

    4.) Breakouts. What the fuck happened to the nice patient reversals that worked against LA? You know that LA and Boston play pretty similar styles in this regard, right? No? Ok so keep firing 50 footers through the neutral sending one guy in against 3 Bruins and see how that works for you. Its been fucking brilliant so far.

    5.) Seriously….thats your powerplay? If thats the case, remember that hit Shaw took and get ready to find another sub for someone who gets a concussion, because Boston will pull that shit all day. The league wont do dick about it, and you can’t make them pay for it so just get ready.

    • HawkIPA

      Rolling Toews with the Fourth Line was idiocy. Stack the top line and force the B’s to counter with Bergeron–he can’t play everyone, and Jagr is a liability on the defensive end if he doesn’t have the puck.

      The power play needs some practice time. Hell, maybe it’s time to suck it up and ask Scotty Bowman’s opinion, because Kompon-Q have been hopeless here.

      • neo1978

        Bruins haven’t done that all season or in the playoffs. During the regular season, the third line took on the opponents top line. During the playoffs, the top line is playing the opponents top line.

        No combination of players, imo, will force Boston to change that. So what Q did makes sense. Use Toews and two defensive guys to negate the Bruins top line. And let the Hawks offensive guys battle on the other three lines.

        40% of Boston’s scoring is coming from their top line. Neither top line scores and that is a huge win for the Hawks. I was suggesting Saad/Frolik as the top line and that was WITH Hossa.

        Two games now, the Bruins newly created third line has made the difference. Not sure that is sustainable by them.

  • laaarmer

    Kruger and Fro and have been the two best forwards for the Hawks this series, maybe longer

    I stopped reading

    • Paul the Fossil

      Yea that was an exaggeration. They have both been good though.

    • putmeinthemadhouse

      i think most consistent is a better descriptor.

    • Ronnie’s Mustache

      Maybe you only watch the puck….

      Who has been better?

      • laaarmer

        Sharp, Toews, Kane, Bickell, Hossa etc. Kruger and Frolik are great penalty killers and 4th line players.

        • Ronnie’s Mustache

          It’s tough because they actually all look pretty bad I guess.

          IMO- Sadd, Hoss, Frolik and Kruger have been playing the best.

          Bickell has been absolutely horrible for the 3 games in this series.

          Sharp hasn’t been effective.

          Kane, not sure what his deal is.

          Toews is playing like he’s tired (who could blame him).

  • Northside Dan

    Two things make me feel like I’m getting an aneurysm this morning.

    1) Q not rolling 88-19-29. That line was pillaging LA. Absolutely pillaging. Force Boston’s hand and dictate the game because Claude is going to have to use Bergeron. Couldn’t agree more with Sam here. I’ll play a depth roshamboe with Boston. Q’s over complicating his lines significantly. Game 4: Dear Q, please make lines 88-19-29, 10-26-81(please be healthy), 20-36-65, 67-16-25.

    2) I know I know, I shouldn’t have been listening to Schuster and Rozner on 670 this morning. I know better. But still, here I am. First they criticized the Hawks for thinking they as a whole played a pretty decent road game..which they did save the 2nd period. Then they managed to figure out the reason why the Hawks lost was fatigue and want. A team who’s average age is 27, played a shortened season and who took out MN and LA in 5 games is fatigued. Such bad radio and is creating a new generation of hockey discussion based solely in which team wants it more.

    • Country_Bumpkin

      First, is this the Northside Dan from CSFMB?

      Second, the reason Q is doing this is simple; 1.) He thinks he is smarter than everyone else or 2.) He has no fucking clue on what to do when he can’t just rely on the skill of his players. Q was getting punked by Babcock, not so much by Sutter, and is getting punked again by Julien.

    • DunkDropsa2

      I would not subject myself to that hot garbage. Mully and Hanley are one thing, but those two will make your ears bleed.

  • Accipiter

    Not that it matters, but neither goal in game 3 went in off the post.

    • dbroadhu

      The Bergeron goal went off the post and in.

      • Accipiter

        Right you are. Just saw the angle from inside the net.

  • laaarmer

    How is Patrick Sharp not the best forward in this series and for some time now?

    • Accipiter

      I thought Hossa was the best F in G1 and Sharp in G2. IMHO up until yesterday 81 and 10 have been the best F’s and with 81 out, 10 stood out in G3.

      • laaarmer

        If he killed penalties, the Bruins would have to be aware of him and his speed. With Hossa out, he needed to be there instead of Saad.

        • laaarmer

          Saad……whatever, but Bolland and Toews? Why not Toews and Sharp?

          • Accipiter

            We got to see 19 and 88 on the PK at the end there.

          • BigCSouthside

            I dont know if I’d always put 88 on the Kill, but in that situation, definitely. You’re down, you need a goal, no one breaks away better than that guy.

            Sharp I think can be more “Hossa-esque” on a kill. I’d trust him to be more protective than Kaner. Plus he is fast. He was definitely the motherfucker last night that was digging to get back in the game.

          • Accipiter

            Oh, I understand why we saw them out there and why Sharp would be a good option, my comment was fatuous.

      • BigCSouthside


  • BigCSouthside

    Can someone clarify for me, isnt there a rule about starting fights etc in the last min of play? Does it require that the gloves be dropped?

    Will any of that come into play if this is the case?

    • ‘hawks58

      I think you’re suspended for the next game if you get an instigator in the last few minutes of a playoff game. Nothing if you start a fight but aren’t tagged with an instigator.

      • BigCSouthside

        Thats it. I couldnt remember

  • Hags

    Although I’m not panicking, this is the 1st series in these playoffs where I don’t feel the Blackhawks are in total control. Even in the Detroit series, everyone could see they were dictating play, and were on the wrong end of some bounces. I am by no means discounting this team’s skill and determination, but that combined with whatever ailment Hossa has is definite cause for concern. HIs presence (or non-presence) in the lineup is critical to everything the Hawks do up and down the lineup.

    • Agree. This is the first team that really has been able to match and even direct play against the Hawks for long periods. The Kings were starting to get there, but dug too big of a hole.

      That said, this is still an extremely close series; after the first ten minutes of the 1st, the game was fairly even. After the Boston goal, the Hawks were finding a ton of time and space for a few minutes… Boston still can’t do a ton 5-on-5… but the sick feeling I have is that this might be the series were the Hawks lack of a PP may just be their undoing. Might. Still lots of hockey to play… go get ’em tomorrow.

      • Hags

        absolutely! win tomorrow and it’s a best of 3 with 2 games at the UC.

        Also, has you or anyone else seen anything about what exactly Hossa’s deal is? Toews and Sharp said they were prepared for him not to play, but I find it hard to believe this was an injury that occurred in game 2 that the team just pantsed everyone on at the last minute. Just judging from the outside it looks like some kind of illness? if he came down with it Monday morning, it would explain Sharp and Toews comments about being prepared, and it also would explain him warming up before ultimately being sat. It makes sense, but we won’t really know until after this series is over most likely.

  • CementHeadStu

    The point being made about the late man coming in on a 3 on 3 or 2 on 2 is a good one. There were a few times in the third period where the hawks did have an open man trailing, and failed to get the puck back. Frolik was guilty of this once on a rare 3 on 2 and instead of dropping it and heading to the net, he took the puck around the net trying to set up a play, but allowing the B’s to get back into their fortress defensive positioning. There were a couple more instances like this, and dropping the puck and crashing the net would have been a much more fortuitous situation rather than waiting for Boston to clog the slot once again. Hopefully that is being addressed as those chances were there in the third, and chances are obviously hard to come by.

  • SaadBuster

    Last night was a punch in the dick for sure, but I’m not going to panic just yet. The power play blows dead goats, but has all year long. At this point, I say fuck special teams and just roll the lines. Can’t be any worse than what we’re seeing.

    Also, this game would’ve been a slaughter but for Corey Crawford. He’s motherfucking Shaft right now. For what it’s worth, I don’t think Rask is better; Rask is just surrounded by the redwood forest the Bruins call their blue line.

    • BigCSouthside

      Rask wasnt really challenged all that much last night, yet everyone had a mindgasm over him in the post game.

      • HawkIPA

        Kane, Seabrook, and Bickell all had him beat in the 3rd. Each barely missed. The Hawks could’ve stolen this game if the bounces went their way like they did in Game 1. They didn’t. Such is the SCF.

  • Paul the Fossil

    Of course we here all know that the PP has been bad all season, but still: generating a single _shot_, total, over a stretch of five powerplays?? That’s beyond embarrassing for a professional coaching staff or should be anyway.

    Much as with faceoffs, not even someone like me who views powerplay success as a low priority for winning in today’s NHL would dispute that being as helpless as they were last night is a real drawback. I was glad that the NBC crew talked about it bluntly and put the cruel facts up on the screen repeatedly.

    • Tomahawk

      Couldn’t agree more. When Q was asked what could improve on the PP, and he said score with a big grin, it pissed me off right good. What you just said is what flew out of my mouth…. You have to be able to shoot the puck to score Jackass! Five PP with some of the best talent on the planet and we can’t hardly get a shot on net?

    • Why

      This has been done to death elsewhere but it’s not just the shots. I’d like to know how many odd main rushes and breakaways the Bruins generated against and right after a Blackhawk’s powerplay. I’m not giving up hope on it yet but the last two games were about as bad as an NHL powerplay can look without actually getting scored on.

  • roadhog

    I think the Bear woke the Indian last night. On to game 4.

  • And here comes the Q is an idiot:
    “When the puck dropped on Game 3 in Boston last night, Chicago’s captain and the NHL’s 2013 Selke Award winner Jonathan Toews took the draw for the road Blackhawks. He’s the same dude who tallied 48 points in 47 regular season games, including 23 goals. The same guy who earned Hart Trophy votes. The same guy who won nearly 60% of his regular season draws, second best in the league. The same guy who…is centering Marcus Kruger and Michael Frolik? Are you f*****g kidding me?”
    It only gets better

    • RVWW

      It’s hard not to agree.

      • Paul the Fossil

        Eh I dunno, Hossa being out changed the range of options. At that point there are basically three All-Star-caliber forwards to distribute, 88/10/19. Put them together and you’re running three lines going out there without any of them. Splitting them up 2 and 1 seems more sensible and it doesn’t seem obvious why one of the three being the 1 is a lot worse than either of the others.

  • DunkDropsa2

    Good points, Fels.

    I don’t feel all that awful about last night, despite the outcome. The Hawks played one of their worst games in quite some time, and really weren’t out of it. If Duncs, Seabs, or Kane hit the net on their looks in the slot, who knows what the outcome would’ve been. And, if they get any semblance of a PP going, this series would quickly tip in the Hawks favor.

    Also, Chara is a cheap punk. Sure he’s huge, and lauded for being an ogre, but he’s an absolute nozzle. Almost to Backes’ level. I find it absurd that the man wearing the “C” for the Bruins would effectively steamroll Bickell in the closing seconds of a win, when Bickell did nothing to warrant a crosscheck to the head, face, and then a pummeling.

    Look for this to be added fuel for the Hawks in game 4.

    • laaarmer

      I loved it that Bickell could care less who it was. He got jumped by a huge player, but got up and went right after him. That battle will be good the remainder of the series. Bickell is a monster.

      Also, Shaw is a tough little fucker. Not as talented as MarshAnd.

      • Accipiter

        I fully expect to see 29 and 65 more physically involved next game. Just like Buff battled Pronger in 2010, Bickell needs to get a few good licks in on Chara.

  • Alexander

    The outcome was terrible, but it was nice to be able to suffer it at the road watch party. Misery loves company I guess.

    I am a little worried that my record at such events is now 0 for 1… Thanks for putting it together anyway, looking forward to going again.

    • Accipiter

      Clearly you didn’t want it enough.

      • 1benmenno


  • laaarmer

    Nick Leddy -7

    • wowwowweewoo

      I was worried about how much his contract would cost after the regular season, but his value has plumetted in these playoffs. He’s still young, and he made a big jump in play in his own zone this year, but he’ll need to make another jump that size to realize his potential. Also he needs to learn a new trick besides burning everyone to enter the zone and circling the net. If he doesn’t show strides on the PK (yes he should be on the PK) and with decision making in the offensive zone, I’d say he’s fully expendable with Clendening’s arrival this year (2nd team AHL all-stars as a Rookie, would have been 1st team if not for Edmonton’s guy & the lockout).

    • ChicagoNativeSon

      Most disappointing Hawks player during the playoffs IMO. No need to look at plus/minus, he’s just looked bad.

      • Z-man19

        I’d call it a tie between him and Bolly

      • amontesawesome

        I think he’s been victimized by some bad luck, though. His on ice save percentage is brutal compared to the other 5 defensemen.

        Not that I think he’s been particularly good, but I just think that warrants mentioning.

        • ChicagoNativeSon

          He’s looked unusually bad defensively. And for one of the faster skaters on the team, he’s getting beat to the outside on rushes far too often.

    • Sparky_The_Bard-barian

      Well, maybe we can afford to resign him now.

  • Sparky_The_Bard-barian

    Stack the top line, make their best come out against our best, even if they neutralize one another, I’ll take my chances with our third and fourth lines against their third and fourth lines.

    We blame Q when he fucks up, we don’t give him credit when he does well. He’s one of the best coaches in the league, but perhaps not the best coach in this series.

    • ahnfire

      Perhaps, but it’s also a big league. Among the 30 coaches, he’s up there, but in the playoffs, when it’s the best teams with often the best coaches, he’s among the bottom of them.

      or at least that’s how it’s felt to me. MIN’s too young to consider, Babs>>>>Q, against Sutter was a push, and Julian is better.

      So it’s not surprising that people would be harping on Q right now.

      • Paul the Fossil

        That seems like a fair assessment.

      • Country_Bumpkin

        Q was clearly outcoached by Babcock and one would think Q would have learned from that experience, but he seems to not have. Q didn’t have much of a challenge from mush-mouth, but Julien looks to being “Babcocking” Quenneville.

        • Sparky_The_Bard-barian

          It doesn’t hurt J’s coaching resume that his D men are deeper than ours.

          • amontesawesome

            Are they? Chara is obviously Chara, but I don’t see the depth.

            Daugavins was claimed off waivers 2 months ago.
            Torey Krug had all of 2 NHL games under his belt before this postseason.

    • ChicagoNativeSon

      Q already took talent off the top line last night so that he could stack the bottom lines. That didn’t work so well.

  • laaarmer

    Hey stats guys!
    When exactly does Toews regress (agress) toward the S% mean?
    Lifetime 15.2% This years playoffs 1.6%
    Unless he’s injured, which he very well could be, it’s about to happen, right?

    • ChicagoNativeSon

      According to my calculations, in approximately 3 games, plus or minus a game for margin of error.

    • Why

      Yeah, I’m waiting for him to finish a couple too. It’s not just the lifetime %, Toews is normally a pretty decent finisher using any statistical or eye test.

      If he gets both of those disallowed goals, his shooting percentage suddenly doesn’t look so bad.

      However, if you ask the Corsi and PDO guys, personal shooting percentage is a matter of luck and you should be looking at the league average.

  • whenhabsscoreDougMohns

    I would emphasize defense despite the very valid points made about offense.
    When a Monster offense is up against a Monster defense, some of the time
    spent cracking that pistachio should go towards stopping the leaks papered
    over playing against weaker teams. It may not be Drysdale, Koufax & Maury Wills
    but against Chara et al you can’t afford the luxury of missing the 1st goal & others.
    Even a European style offensive player like Kukoc tightened up his defense; maybe.
    Baseball, basketball, cliche time, means defense.
    On a positive note, the Blackhawks have solved 1 of their 4 main problems.
    In order of severity:
    1) Versus last year, blooper goals have pretty much been resolved. Corey Crawford has been
    superb, a he-man radical Big Dawg effort. Think the Lion King’s jockstrap AND
    a codpiece.
    2) Defense
    Pilsner Urquell 4.4% => La Fin de Monde (The End of The World) 9%
    Not nice to try to scapegoat one player with good plus/minus in a team sport at
    the world class athlete level, but it feels like watching Owning Mahowny
    with Philip Seymour Hoffman. The Bruins are putting the big John Hurt on him,
    hot potato only works in N.Y. with Filet Mignon. Almost better to ice the puck than
    fling it recklessly off the lawn like a bison turd. Skate a bit, pass a bit > 5 feet.
    Film review of the 70s shows Stapleton, White, Russell, Marotte, Korab good at this.
    These Hawks are fun to watch & exciting as were those Cup contenders.
    Hjalmarsson is rock solid.
    Oduya & Leddy seemed to have had a bit of trouble staying down on the farm last year,
    a different problem, but they seemed to change their style of play a bit to pick their chances
    & the improvement seemes dramatic to me, although still an earnest peak cardio work-out.
    3) Dumb penalties.
    4) Power play. Margin of error lost for other errors/faceoffs.

    And yes, please stick more with Kaner, Toews & Bickell as well as Keith & Seabrook.
    Juggling is fun & spontaneous to avoid the lackluster but not so much with the dining room
    Ming vases.

  • Mike

    The faceoff and PP point you made cracks me up. I got a text from a friend post-game telling me that the PP needs to be fixed. I thought, nevermind, you’re a Rangers fan. Obviously you haven’t been watching the season(s) of bad PP. But the hawks have been very successful without it, so there are plenty of other things to blame first.

  • G Man

    Great write up Sam. Agree with 99% of the points. The lack of adjustments is
    driving me crazy. PP is brutal. Even worse than rest of year. Why not crash the net with speed instead of trying to set up which has worked? Why are Shaw and Bicks now playing so far from the net? Why aren’t we rolling all four lines, keeping everyone fresh like we have all year? We beat very strong Detroit and LA teams and we have forgotten how we got it done. We didn’t do it with a automatic PP. We didn’t do it with 19 getting a point a game. He has shut the other team’s #1 down, and the balance of the team has won with 60 minutes of speed and puck possession.

  • CommonSense1957

    While questionable coaching has played a part in creating the current situation, we must remember that Q’s coaching moves (outside the Power Play) worked for the most part for the first seven periods of this series (Game 1 and first period of Game 2). It’s been since then that he and his staff have been scrutinized. Other nagging concerns:
    – Toews and Saad constantly fumbling puck while driving to the net. While I know this happens 9 of 10 times to even the best players, it’s seems like it’s happened 50/50 times. Toews can’t seem to finish any more. His skating with Kruger and Fro seemed more of a demotion for him that a promotion of the other two guys (who were nowhere near the Hawks best forwards of this series so far).
    – Bolly is being lambasted for penalties but at least a couple of them occurred because he was covering for a teammate who was completed beaten or out of position.
    – Leddy skating 200 feet behind opponent’s net and then not being supported by teammates is almost comically sad

    I still think the Hawks will win the series if they find a way to win game 4.

  • amontesawesome

    “I find it so hilarious that everyone is in shock over what the faceoffs and power play look like. Have they not been paying attention?”

    Re: Faceoffs, this is what I meant last week when I said people tend to grossly misunderstand statistics, particularly when it comes to faceoff percentages.

    During the regular season, the Blackhawks won 51% of all draws. Last night, the Blackhawks won 29%, or 16 of 56. What is the probability that a team that, over a relatively large sample, won 51% to only win 16 or less of 56?

    Obviously, there is no perfect formula to calculating these odds. But, we can use a binomial probability distribution. After all, there are only two outcomes to each face off “trial” and given the relative large sample size of faceoffs that accumulate during the regular season, I see no reason to assume that the season-long percentage wouldn’t represent a reasonable p(X). So, using a binomial probability distribution, what are the odds that a something with a .51 probability would lead to only 16 successes out of 56 trials? Less than one percent. I concede that a binomial probability distribution isn’t perfect, but I don’t see of anything better.

    Now, is it possible that the team’s 51% faceoff win percentage during the regular season was smoke and mirrors based on the team feasting at the dot against lesser teams and that, once in the shit of the playoffs they are exposed for who they really are? I suppose, but I really, really doubt it. BUT, let me concede that point and run the distribution again.

    During the playoffs the Hawks are 46% at the dot. Using a binomial probability distribution, what are the chances that a 46% chance winds up winning 16 or fewer trials out of 56?

    Less than one percent.

    Why should someone be in shock over what the faceoffs looked like last night? I have no idea

    • Why

      I don’t have a perfect formula either although I’d look at including the Bruins when determining what percentage to use as your variable. Bob wins 70% of beer pong games and Jim wins 40% of beer pong games, what are Bob’s chances of beating Jim. Off the top of my head, I’d weigh the Bob’s success and Jim’s failure equally when calculating Bob’s chances of winning a game (1/2 of 70% = 35%, 1/2 of 60% = 30%). 35% + 30% = 65%. There are also flaws with using that system.

      All that’s pedantic and doesn’t change your argument. The Blackhawks were much worse at the dot last night then I’d expect them to be normally.

  • ajksweetness

    The B’s scored 3 consecutive goals (both goals in game 2, 1st goal in game 3) on plays that started by beating Leddy behind his net. Leddy is a lot of things, but it did not take them long to figure out that this is where they will generate chances from any of their lines