The Chicago Blackhawks Are Bad

After two consecutive playoff oustings, you'd think it would be difficult to find a Vancouver Canucks fan who has anything but ill will for the Chicago Blackhawks. Unfortunately, this isn't the case, as some people think the Blackhawks are all right. Yes, some people have a hard time hating a team with plenty of ties to the West Coast. Some people watched Jonathan Toews lead Canada to an Olympic gold medal, and they think he's A-okay. And some people simply have the Blackhawks confused with other things. Good things. Things for which they feel fondness.

It's time to clear this up once and for all. People, hear me: the Chicago Blackhawks are bad. BAD. If you think they are good, you obviously have them confused with something else. That thing cannot possibly be the Blackhawks, because the Blackhawks are bad.

You may be thinking of Black Hawk, the Lakota artist whose 76 colour drawings are a part of Native American ledger art history. Black Hawk is admirable and sympathetic, especially since he was killed in the Wounded Knee Massacre of 1890. If you feel admiration and sympathy, you're likely thinking of Black Hawk. You couldn't possibly be thinking of the Chicago Blackhawks, who are neither admirable nor sympathetic. They are the worst kind of bad. They're named after atrocities.

Consider the Black Hawk Purchase, a land acquisition made in what is now Iowa. This purchase came on the heels of the Black Hawk War, during which Sauk chief Black Hawk was taken prisoner. It was during Black Hawk's captivity that the land was sold, so one would assume he had little bargaining power. He also didn't get a fair shake from historians, who tell us that his motives for waging this dispute were "ambiguous," although there's hardly much ambiguity about defending one's property.

Leave it to the white man to extort land and distort history, right? Well, you know who has a lot of white men? The Chicago Blackhawks, who have compounded Black Hawk's humiliation by stealing his name. You know what's not ambiguous? The badness of the Chicago Blackhawks.

Still think the Blackhawks are good? You must be confused. Maybe you're thinking of Black Hawk Down, the Ridley Scott film about a fallen Black Hawk helicopter. Rotten Tomatoes tells us that 77% of critics felt this film was "fresh". However, this film was produced by Jerry Bruckheimer and stars Josh Hartnett. Here's another film on which they collaborated: Pearl Harbour. That film was historically bad. Also bad? The Chicago Blackhawks, who, sources say, knew about the plan to bomb Pearl Harbour and didn't tell anybody.

Okay, that's not true. But that doesn't make them any less bad. They're quite bad.

If you think the Blackhawks are good, you're probably thinking of the Atlanta Blackhawks, the San Francisco Bay Blackhawks, the Waterloo Blackhawks, the Iowa Blackhawks or the Plattling Black Hawks. What do all these teams have in common? If you think it's their nickname, you're wrong. It's the fact that they are all less bad than the Chicago Blackhawks.

You may be thinking of Nighthawks, the classic Edward Hopper painting. Makes sense. It's located at the Art Institute of Chicago, which, like the Blackhawks, is in Chicago, but, unlike the Blackhawks, is good. The Blackhawks are bad, like the Great Chicago Fire, which destroyed the Art Institute's original building in 1871. Were the Chicago Blackhawks involved? Perhaps; they're bad. Are they arsonists? They've never gone record saying they're not.

If you still think the Blackhawks are good, it's possible you're confusing them with some other kind of hawk. Kitty Hawk, perhaps? That North Carolina city is near where the Wright brothers first flew airplanes. That was good, but do you know who later flew airplanes? Terrorists, who are bad. And don't think I'm actively trying to get you to associate the Chicago Blackhawks with terrorism, but they did hold a public demonstration of some sort in the streets of Chicago last July. Was it a terrorist rally? We simply don't know.

You may also be thinking of Nighthawks at the Diner, the classic Tom Waits album based on Edward Hopper's painting. Tom Waits is good. Unfortunately, whenever you think of early period Tom Waits, you run the risk of thinking about Billy Joel, to whom Waits was compared in the late seventies. Billy Joel is bad. What do Billy Joel and the Chicago Blackhawks have in common? No redeeming qualities.

I could go on. It's also possible you're thinking of blackjack, Jack Black, backhoes, backlogs, backrubs, black hats, black cats, back catalogs, black ops, black cod, black hogs, hockey, Hawkeye, bedrock, Beck, or Black Bond Books. Frankly, you sound confused, so here's a simple maxim to get you through: whatever you're thinking of, it's better than the Chicago Blackhawks.

In closing, the Chicago Blackhawks are bad.

2011 Round One Preview: Chicago Blackhawks

Let's make sure, whatever we do, this never happens again.

For the third year in a row, the Vancouver Canucks will be facing the Chicago Blackhawks in the Stanley Cup playoffs. After two ignominious defeats in the second round, this year the Canucks will get the chance to exorcise their playoff demons in round one. The match-up is one the media, fans, and players have been eagerly anticipating, but it's not exactly a pure re-match.

The Blackhawks of 2010-11 are not the Blackhawks of 2009-10. Last season, the Blackhawks were just plain better than the Canucks. In the off-season, however, due to some mismanagement of the cap by Dale Tallon, the Hawks said farewell to much of their vaunted depth. Gone are Ben Eager, Andrew Ladd, Kris Versteeg, Brent Sopel, Colin Fraser, Adam Burish, John Madden and Canuck nemesis Dustin Byfuglien. Gone, too, are both goaltenders from last season. Playoff hero Antti Niemi signed with the San Jose Sharks while Cristobal Huet was sent to Switzerland to eat chocolate, wear pocket watches, and design knives.

There are a lot of new faces on the Blackhawks this season, including long-time rival Marty Turco, who is a shell of his former self. Goaltending duties will instead be handled by rookie Corey Crawford, who has performed admirably, posting a .918 SV% and a 2.27 GAA. Turco, on the other hand, has had a terrible year, posting career lows in save percentage and goals against average. Other new faces include Viktor Stalberg, acquired in the Versteeg trade with the Leafs, Michael Frolik, acquired from the Florida Panthers, and Ryan Johnson. Yes, that Ryan Johnson. Mr. Purple Shins is now sporting a Blackhawks jersey.

Still, the core of the team has remained intact despite the multitude of moves made around them. Toews, Kane, Sharp, and Hossa anchor a potent offence that finished 4th in the league in goals-for, just 4 goals behind the Canucks. They also boast the leading minute-muncher in the NHL in Duncan Keith, who averages almost 27 minutes per game. While he took a step back from last year's Norris-winning season, particularly defensively, he still put up 45 points. Meanwhile, his partner on defense, Brent Seabrook, surpassed him with a career high 48 points.

Honestly, I am shocked that the Blackhawks fell to 8th: I predicted they wouldn't and anticipated a potential second-round match-up against the Stanley Cup Champions, just for its poetic nature. The Blackhawks are too good a team to be the 8th seed. Their +33 goal differential is good for 7th in the NHL, 3rd in the Western Conference. Their first line is stupendous, their second line is dangerous, and their powerplay is potent. So what are they doing in 8th?

The issue, of course, is lack of depth. Their defense behind Keith, Seabrook, and Campbell is suspect. Their bottom-six is sketchy and often unreliable. These two issues combined explain their terrible penalty killing, which is 25th in the league.

As Harrison pointed out earlier this season, the depth players for the Blackhawks last season are making big contributions to their respective teams this season. Andrew Ladd was named captain in Atlanta and led the Thrashers in scoring. Second in team scoring was Dustin Byfuglien, who thrived on the opportunity to play defense again, finishing 4th in the NHL in points amongst defensemen. Kris Versteeg scored 46 points between the Leafs and the Flyers, Brent Sopel blocked 152 shots and led the Thrashers in shorthanded time-on-ice before being traded to the Canadiens, and John Madden led the Minnesota Wild in shorthanded time-on-ice amongst forwards. When you take away these quality players from the Blackhawks, they become a lesser team.

That's not to say that the Blackhawks will be easy to beat in round one of the playoffs; they are still a dangerous team, particularly on the powerplay. But the Canucks have been a dominant team all season, winning the President's Trophy while finishing first in both goals-for and goals-against. Which reminds me: there's one other big difference between last season's Blackhawks and this season's.

This year, the Blackhawks are the underdogs.

Who Do the Canucks Want to Face in the First Round?

With the Canucks having sewn up their spot in the playoffs via a clever combination of playing in the terrible Northwest division and being the best team in the NHL, the time has come to consider who the Canucks will face in the playoffs. With a comfortable 10 point lead on the Red Wings for first place in the Conference, the Canucks could safely go .500 over their remaining 8 games and still be guaranteed top spot. So let's look at the teams that could end up in the 8th spot and face the Canucks in the first round.

Mathematically, there are still 12 teams that could potentially finish in 8th. Still, it's safe to say that the Red Wings and the Sharks won't be taking such a drastic fall. Similarly, the Blues, Blue Jackets, and Wild are unlikely to make improbable runs to the playoffs over their few remaining games. That still leaves 7 viable teams who could wind up facing the Canucks in the first round: the Coyotes, Blackhawks, Kings, Predators, Ducks, Stars, or Flames. Which of those teams would be an ideal match-up for the Canucks? Obviously, the Canucks don't need to be afraid to face any team this postseason, but which team would be preferable?

Calgary Flames
Currently 10th with 85 points
Season Series: 4-0-1

Likelihood of 8th: The Flames are the least likely to make the playoffs of all the teams on the bubble, thanks to having the fewest games remaining. They haven't done themselves any favors, either, losing their last three games, two of them against teams just above them in the standings. In order to make the playoffs, they will need to win each of their final six games and have two of the teams ahead of them go under .500 down the stretch. If all goes well for the Flames, their final game of the season against the Canucks will be a potential playoff preview and a win-and-you're-in scenario. Otherwise, it will instead be a chance for Daniel Sedin to cement the Art Ross Trophy in the same way Henrik did last season: with sheer absurdity.

Do we want them in the first round? Yes please. It's hard to argue with a 4-0-1 record, with the only loss coming via the shootout. The Canucks have owned the Flames like they're majority shareholders this season. In addition, it just feels right: in their only two runs to the Stanley Cup Finals, the Canucks met and defeated the Flames in the opening round of the playoffs. That's the kind of history I can get behind.

Dallas Stars
Currently 9th with 86 points
Season Series: 4-0-0

Likelihood of 8th: After a strong start to the season, the Stars have regressed severely, to the point that if the playoffs started today, they wouldn't be in them. This shouldn't be a surprise. The early success of the Stars was a function of good luck and a hot goaltender, two things that rarely persist throughout a season. Still, the Stars have a decent chance to sneak into 8th spot, as they are just 1 point behind Anaheim and 2 points behind Nashville, Los Angeles, and Chicago, with 9 games remaining. Considering that their final four games are against the woeful Blue Jackets, Avalanche, and Wild, it would not be the least bit surprising.

Do we want them in the first round? As Professor Farnsworth would say, "Oh my, yes." The Canucks haven't just beaten the Stars in each of their meetings, they've throttled them, with an overall goal differential of +15 over four games. In those four games, the Stars have been exposed as exactly what they are: a mediocre team that has gotten extraordinarily lucky. It's difficult to imagine a better first round opponent for the Canucks to face.

Anaheim Ducks

Currently 8th with 87 points
Season Series: 2-2-0

Likelihood of 8th: Since the Ducks are already in 8th, their odds of finishing in 8th are quite good. Unfortunately, they're also the only team in this discussion that has a negative goal differential and they've gone through some tough times without their superb Swiss netminder, Jonas Hiller. Of course, now comes the news that Hiller is back with the team and will be playing tonight. The question then becomes, will he be the pre-injury Hiller again or will there be an adjustment period. With only 9 games remaining in their schedule, an adjustment period could easily result in the Ducks slipping out of the playoffs.

Do we want them in the first round? Goodness gracious, no. While there is no doubt in my mind that the Canucks would win a playoff series against the Ducks, it would not come without a cost. The Ducks are a big, fast, and physical team, especially when it comes to the playoffs. Their top line doesn't just score goals; they finish their checks and aggravate goaltenders. I would rather the Canucks didn't enter the playoffs bruised, battered, and beleaguered. If the Ducks finish in 9th or 7th? Great. Keep them out of 8th.

Nashville Predators
Currently 7th with 88 points
Season Series: 1-2-0

Likelihood of 8th: As I (very safely) predicted at the start of the season, the Nashville Predators will make the playoffs. It is always foolish to bet against Barry Trotz and his band of Bee-Gee-loving brothers. Please note that the reports of the Predators loving the Bee Gees are as yet unconfirmed. The Predators are in a slightly precarious situation, however, as they have only 8 games remaining compared to 9 for many of their compatriots. Given how tight the standings are, the Predators can't afford to let up.

Do we want them in the first round? The Predators are one of only two teams on this list that has a winning record against the Canucks. They pushed last year's Stanley Cup Champions, the Chicago Blackhawks, to 6 games, and were arguably the 'Hawks toughest test of the postseason. They're a tough, hardworking team with top-end talent on defense, a potential Hart candidate in goal, and balanced scoring throughout their forwards. And yet, I'm not the least bit scared of them. The Canucks have the skill, grit, and mentality to beat the Predators; it would be a tight series, but definitely a winnable series. Home ice advantage will be key: the Predators are 20-8-7 at home but only 19-17-3 on the road.

Los Angeles Kings
Currently 6th with 88 points
Season Series: 1-1-1

Likelihood of 8th: Like the Predators and the Blackhawks, the Kings have a slim two-point lead on the Dallas Stars to remain in the playoffs. Their appointed starter, Jonathan Quick, has faltered down the stretch, leading the Kings to go with their other Jonathan, the rookie Bernier, more and more. Thanks to a solid defensive corps and five forwards with 20+ goals, the Kings have been able to weather their occasionally shaky goaltending, and it's likely that they will be enough to keep them in the top 8 in the West, but it's entirely likely it will be by the skin of their teeth.

Do we want them in the first round? More than you'd think. Yes, the Kings have a winning record against the Canucks, but their two victories came at the start of the season when the Canucks faltered out of the gate and took a few games to get their legs under them. Having witnessed the Canucks' victory over the Kings in person with a multitude of other Canucks fans, I would love to see a west coast match-up with the potential for bus/plane-loads of Vancouverites invading the Staples Center. That said, what matters is what happens on the ice, and the offensive firepower of the Canucks grossly outclasses that of the Kings. Plus it's a re-match of last season's first round, which is always fun.

Chicago Blackhawks

Currently 5th with 88 points
Season Series: 2-1-1

Likelihood of 8th: Yet another team with 88 points, the Blackhawks are the least likely of the trio to slip to 8th or out of the playoffs altogether. The Blackhawks had no business being as far down in the standings as they were throughout most of the season, as a multitude of bad bounces and losses in one-goal games made them look far worse than they actually are. They have had one of the best goal-differentials in the Western Conference (currently second behind the Canucks) all season long, even when they were slumming it with the cellar dwellers. As much as they are not as good as last season, particularly on their bottom-six and in goal, they still have high-end talent in their top-six forwards and a great group of defensemen. They won't slip to 8th...

Do we want them in the first round? … and besides, we don't want to face them in the first round. There's no poetry to meeting and defeating the Blackhawks in the first round of the playoffs after being ousted by them in the second round the last two seasons. It would be a far better story for the Canucks and Blackhawks to meet once more in the second round, with the chance to turn the relationship between the two teams into a true rivalry. After all, it's not a rivalry if one team keeps winning all the important games. Let's save the Blackhawks for Round Two.

Phoenix Coyotes

Currently 4th with 91 points.
Season Series: 2-2-0

Likelihood of 8th: The Coyotes are the least likely team on this list to fall to 8th, if only because they have a 3-point cushion and there are so many teams below them. It's not out of the realm of possibility, but the Coyotes are more likely to focus on trying to catch the Sharks for the Pacific Division. That said, they only have 7 games remaining, 5 of them at home, where they have struggled in comparison with their road record. If that trend continues, one of Nashville, Los Angeles, or Chicago could catch up to them and take away their home ice advantage. I don't see them slipping all the way to 8th, however.

Do we want them in the first round? If they did fall to 8th, it would be a decent match-up for the Canucks, who have split their season series with the Coyotes (with some help). Phoenix has elite goaltending, as long as Bryzgalov is on his game, decent defense (including, if can you believe it, Adrian Aucoin), a misshapen conglomeration of the NHL's discarded forwards, and a brilliant coach. The brilliant coach is the one to keep an eye out for: Dave Tippett is as good a coach as there is in the NHL and he keeps the Coyotes competitive despite their lower payroll.

So who should it be? Unsurprisingly, the two teams in this group that the Canucks would most want to face are the two teams currently outside the Top 8. For the sake of nostalgia, the Calgary Flames would be a dream match-up, but they'll be hard-pressed to even make the playoffs. Instead, I hope to see the Dallas Stars squeak their way into the playoffs, preferably by going all-out over their remaining 9 games, leaving them with nothing left for the playoffs. In lieu of the Flames or Stars, say it with me: anyone but Anaheim.

Obama Just Got Keslurked

Oh Ryan Kesler, you so crazy. This image, taken during the Blackhawks' visit to the White House yesterday comes to us courtesy of egatti, Canucks.com forum photoshopper extraordinnaire.

Part of me wonders where the secret service is, because this is some legit incompetence. Maybe the NHL let them monitor the crowd from the War Room? I can picture it now: Hey! This isn't a live feed to the crowd, this is the parade scene from Animal House! #NHLWarRoomQuotes

And then, because it's right near the end anyway, they'll keep watching. Who can blame them?John Belushi was awesome.

Ryan Kesler Is a Quiet Leader

The opening goal of Friday night's game versus the Blackhawks is scored when Christian Ehrhoff comes off the bench and immediately steps into a slapshot on the blueline. It beats Marty Turco cleanly. But here is something you might have missed:

We see, in clip above, Ryan Kesler turn back to the bench, seemingly disinterested in the goal that was just scored. He even commits the cardinal sin of leaving Ehrhoff hanging on a high five, instead coolly gesturing to the bench. Ignoring the immense sociological ramifications of being stiffed on a high five (even Gandhi couldn't handle it), what Kesler's issue here?

Well. Kesler takes his assistant captaincy very, very seriously. No time for silly high fives when there's leadership to be done.

It's important to note that this goal happens during a line change. In the IWTG, Skeeter pointed out that Cody Hodgson starts this play when he smartly puts the puck on net, low to Turco's pad, rather than dumping it in. Immediately after doing this, Hodgson initiates a line change and Ryan Kesler replaces him. But, because it's Hodgson's line that scores, Kesler foregoes celebrating the goal to ensure that Hodgson's role in it is acknowledged and the young centre doesn't miss the on-ice goal celebration. He immediately turns back to the bench and tells Hodgson to join his linemates.

It's a small thing, but it shows the selflessness and egality of the Canucks' core guys. It's an admirable moment of quiet leadership that undoubtedly meant a lot to young Hodgson.

Christian Ehrhoff, meanwhile, is still trying to to overcome the commensurate damage to his fragile psyche. Consider his turn as flail snail later in the same game: broken, he desperately tried to high-five Viktor Stalberg's face. Ironically, he may be on the precipice of the same dark times that Cody Hodgson has recently overcome. If you see him, give him a high five. He's one short.

Hat tip to Canucks.com forum member Hodgson99 for catching this one.

I Watched This Game: Canucks vs. Blackhawks, February 4, 2011

Canucks 4 - 3 Blackhawks

Was that an exciting game or what? The correct answer is not "what." Chicago came out flying tonight and put the Canucks on their heels through most of this game. It can be argued that they deserved the win: a questionable no-goal call went against the 'Hawks and the Canucks' first goal was demonstrably offside. Having felt the burn of poor officiating in the past, I certainly sympathize with Blackhawks' fans. At the same time, the 'Hawks had ample opportunity to win this game and gave up two leads, so it's a little unfair to place the blame solely on the referees.

In any case, the Canucks were, arguably, outplayed in this game. But, their best players were their best players and they won. It was marvelous. I watched this game.

• We at PITB have frequently complained about Luongo's tendency to use his glove to punch pucks rather than catch them. Tonight Luongo proved that Rollie Melanson reads Pass it to Bulis. Clearly Melanson took our complaints to heart and taught Luongo the proper use of his trapper. One of his finest glove saves can be seen above, but there seemed to be dozens of slick glove stops from Lu in this game. He was very, very good. It took a wide-open all-star and two rather unfortunate bounces tonight to get the puck past him.

• Chris Tanev made up for Luongo's lack of punchiness by punching in the Blackhawks' third goal. It was an unfortunate moment for the rookie who has played remarkably well since being called up. Unfortunately, with Andrew Alberts set to return soon and Sami Salo remaining remarkably uninjured during his first game for the Manitoba Moose, Tanev won't be with the Canucks for much longer. Still, he has vaulted his way up the depth chart like an angry pole vaulter and I have a feeling we'll see a lot more of him in the future.

• The Canucks' top line combined for 12 shots on goal and had another 9 attempts blocked or miss the net. They seemed to be the only line that was able to create sustained offensive pressure. Henrik finished with a goal and two assists to earn first-star honors. His bloodthirsty brother not only became the NHL's leading scorer tonight, he also passed Markus Naslund to become the Canucks' all-time record holder for game-winning goals. Remember when people used to claim the Sedins weren't clutch?

• Cody Hodgson had a decent game despite barely playing. A big reason for Ehrhoff's goal was Hodgson's smart play in gaining the zone and throwing the puck on net, which Tanner Glass reciprocated, creating the massive rebound for Ehrhoff to blast past Turco. Discussions of the offside nature of the goal aside, that was a hell of a slapshot. It ripped a hole in time, love and space, and was behind Turco before Ehrhoff even shot it.

• On the other hand, Hodgson went 1-for-5 in the faceoff circle and only played 7:11. And he left the ice too quickly to get a +1 in his plus-minus column. Kesler, Malhotra, and Henrik made up for Hodgson's lack in the circle, going 14-for-21, 10-for-15, and 12-for-16 respectively. Unfortunately, the Canucks went 8-for-20 in the defensive zone, a big reason why the Blackhawks always seemed to be there.

• The TSN intermission crew did a great job analyzing the two controversial plays, one highlighting the fact that Ehrhoff's goal was indeed offside and one showing that Troy Brouwer did in fact make contact with Luongo's blocker on Bolland's controversial disallowed Chicago goal. Still, the fact that it was such a minuscule piece of contact means it's still a bit of a sketchy call.

• Rough night for the third line, as they all finished on the minus side of the ledger. Particularly rough for Hansen, who finished a game-low -3 as he was on the ice for all three Chicago goals. It's unfortunate for Torres, as he was very noticeable on the ice tonight, throwing a couple solid checks and blocking 3 shots. Malhotra was solid in the faceoff circle, but was thoroughly victimized by Jonathan Toews on the Blackhawks' first goal, as he was squeezed off the puck against the boards and wasn't able to recover to pressure Toews before the shot.

• Aaron Rome played a physical game: he was only credited with 2 hits, but they were big, noticeable hits. Unfortunately, he also was credited with 3 giveaways and almost cost the Canucks a goal when he tried to give Luongo a hug behind the net. To his credit, he recovered and slid behind Luongo to make a knee save on the subsequent goalscoring chance, but it was a clear sign that he has missed a few games and is a bit out of sync. That by itself is a reason to get him back into the game ahead of Lee Sweatt. An out-of-sync Rome in the playoffs would be potentially disastrous.

• Hips laid out Kopecky with a solid hipcheck, then followed it up with a picture perfect shotblock, also on Kopecky. You may have also noticed Luongo's enormous glove save on Kopecky at the top of the page. Basically, it wasn't a good night to be Kopecky. It was almost as bad as the Olympics, when the closed captioning spelled out his name as "Could Pets Ski." Unfortunate.

• Ehrhoff doesn't seem to get angry very often, but when he does, look out. He flipped out on Stalberg, flailing around like a Flail Snail. I admit, I only wanted to mention this so I could link to the Flail Snail. Seriously. Flail Snail.

• Samuelsson has been fantastic lately: he had 5 shots on goal, including this blast from the point on the powerplay that deflected past Turco. Even prettier, however, was his pass on Henrik's goal. Leading up to the goal were, of course, two Sedin backpasses, but those are so routine that pointing them out seems superfluous. Meanwhile, Kesler braved the crotch-hacking dangers of the front of the net, and set a perfect screen on Turco. So everyone was involved except Ehrhoff, who was too busy daydreaming about punching Stalberg.

• Daniel's gamewinning goal was a prime example of Wizardous Sedinerie: Daniel clearly used Mage Hand to levitate that puck over Turco. Now, since there were no somatic or verbal components, he must have both Silent Spell and Still Spell as feats. Applying both feats would increase the level of the spell by 2, meaning that Daniel Sedin must be, at minimum, a third-level Wizard.

• I'm a big fan of Ray Ferraro. He's one of the best colour commentators in the business. I don't have a joke here, I just felt like it needed to be said.

• An indication of how good a game Luongo had can be found by looking at the Blackhawks' four leading shooters: Patrick Sharp and Brian Campbell had 6 shots apiece and Marian Hossa and Patrick Kane had 7 each. Not one of them scored. Luongo answered the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything with 42 saves.

Maybe the Blackhawks Were Just Better Than Us

I've said before that Vancouver fans and media often suffer unfortunate bouts of tunnel vision when it comes to the Canucks. A Canucks' win is followed by praise, and a Canucks' loss is followed by blame, but nothing is ever attributed to the opponent. How did they play? Who plays for them? Is anybody on their team talented? Apart from gushing over Sidney Crosby, Alex Ovechkin, or tonight, Steven Stamkos, we often assume the guys who play for other teams have about as much volition as the targets in Hogan's Alley.

Recall an instance earlier this season when Alain Vigneault stood up for his defensemen following a game-winning Kings goal: "It was a simple 2-on-2 and two of their good players beat our two good defencemen and that's going to happen." It's incredible to me Vigneault needed to remind people that the Kings have players who can score, even on guys who are supposed to stop them from scoring.

Guys like Roberto Luongo, who takes blame for any goal, regardless of the circumstances. Did you know that a large part of an NHL players' livelihood is scoring on superstar goalies? They can do that.

With this in mind, it's typical that Vancouver's two consecutive oustings at the hands of the Chicago Blackhawks have been painted as little more than collapses, disappointments, or failures on the part of the Canucks. It seems nobody's been willing to consider the opponent, or perhaps even utter the anathematic truth that, even at the Canucks best, the Blackhawks were just better.

The Kurtenblog pointed some of this out a month ago, but let's return to the argument. Consider the offseason turnover in Chicago: up against the cap, the Blackhawks were forced to jettison Dustin Byfuglien, Andrew Ladd, Kris Versteeg, Brent Sopel, Ben Eager, Adam Burish, and John Madden. Among others. Effectively, they lost their entire bottom-six and the brunt of their defensive depth.

How is the former Blackhawks' bottom-six doing for their new teams? Incredibly. Dustin Byfuglien and Andrew Ladd are one and two in Thrashers scoring. More impressive, Ladd has been named Atlanta's captain, and Byfuglien is doing that scoring from the back-end. Brent Sopel leads Atlanta in blocked shots by a wide margin (20 more than the next closest skater), and Ben Eager is tops in PIM and hits. In Toronto, Kris Versteeg is averaging just over 20 minutes a night. He's 5th in goals and points, 3rd in shots on goal, and 1st in takeaways. But the most incredible thing about lost members of the Blackhawks playoff roster is this: they're all still in the NHL, and only Colin Fraser averages less than 10 minutes a night (at 9:56).

Canucks fans celebrated the somewhat sad dismantling of one of the deepest NHL rosters we've seen in decades, while ignoring the fact that their team actually underwent a similar turnover. Our bottom-six is effectively gone too, as the Canucks willfully said goodbye to Kyle Wellwood, Pavol Demitra, Ryan Johnson, Shane O'Brien, Michael Grabner, Steve Bernier, and Matt Pettinger. Demitra, Johnson, Wellwood and Pettinger are no longer playing in the NHL, and Grabner nearly suffered a similar fate after the Florida Panthers, who acquired him in a trade, placed him on waivers at the end of training camp. Steve Bernier has been playing on the fourth line. And Shane O'Brien has the third-worst plus-minus on the Nashville Predators.

I'm cherry-picking stats a little to make my point, but still: one year removed from a playoff series Vancourites label as a Canucks collapse, former Chicago Blackhawks are making names for themselves in the NHL. Meanwhile, former Vancouver Canucks are adding umlauts to their jerseys in Europe.

Do you think this had something to do with the outcome last May? I know we might hate to admit it, but it's possible the Blackhawks were simply icing a better team. In fact, it's more than possible. It's likely. In fact, it's more than likely. It's just true. Yes, we had a Selke candidate; so did they. We had a gold-medal winner; they had three. We had an Art Ross and a Hart. They had a Norris, and a Calder, and a Conn Smythe. And, behind these guys, they had an NHL roster.

It's hard for Canuck fans to see past their own team. We know our guys; we know their shortcomings and their potential, and we expect them to step it up. But, more often than not, we're just fooling ourselves and hoping for an upset. The Chicago Blackhawks team was so good that their bottom-six could be the top-six on other teams. The proof is in the pudding. Vancouver's bottom-six, on the other hand, was so questionable that, six months later, they're the bottom six for teams in Europe. I know it's tough to admit, what with the grudges we hold, but the Blackhawks were an incredible team. The Canucks played them well, but when they lost, we shouldn't have blamed them.

We should have blamed the Blackhawks.

I Watched This Game: Canucks at Blackhawks, December 3, 2010

Canucks 3 - 0 Blackhawks

What a relief. I was getting tired of hearing people say that the Blackhawks were in Luongo's head. Apparently, not only are they not, but we learned what is: beatnik poetry. Louie thinks he's Allen Ginsburg.

Yes, Roberto Luongo's poetry off the ice was about as bad as Vogon poetry (3rd worst in the universe), but his poetry on the ice was downright Keatsian. He made 32 saves for the shutout, including more than a handful of the genus spectacular. His padstack on Pat Kane was reminiscent of Kirk McLean, and his toe kick on Tomas Kopecky was as great a desperation save as we've ever seen him make. I'm a shortsighted guy and prone to superlative, so take this for what it's worth, but this was one of the best games Roberto Luongo has ever played. And I watched it:

• As far as I'm concerned, the intermission poetry gag actually played right into how the Canucks are beginning to approach the Blackhawks: lightly. Apart from the sleepy Voldemort game (which shall not be named), Vancouver has taken 3 of a possible 4 points in two games with the Blackhawks. Interestingly, neither game has been particularly filled with bad blood. I'll touch on this later in a guest post for Canucks Hockey Blog, but this year's Canucks seem to be playing lighter and with a lot less emotion. It's very zen. Is it the calming captaincy of robot Henrik (Robotrik)? Is is an organizational mandate from Gillis on down? I speculate that it's both. Either way, the Canucks have quietly beaten their two worst rivals in back-to-back games with calm and collected efforts. Luongo even asked mortal enemy Pat Kane if he was all right after a stick caught him in the face. That's like Wario offering Mario a fire flower. Kane seemed bemused, to put it mildly.
  
  
• Jeff Tambellini didn't net a goal last night, thereby ending his point streak, but he had a couple of incredible chances, and he led the team with 6 hits. 6 hits! I think he's earned a permanent spot in the lineup. He better have. The Canucks are now 9-0-1 when he plays, and their forward lines are considerably better.
  
  
• That includes the fourth line, responsible for last night's game winner (above). I've caught some flack for my insistence that Tanner Glass remains on the fourth line, but the truth is, as much as I don't like him on the third, I love him on the fourth. He's done some yeomanly work there considering his rotating cast, but now that he's been paired with Jannik Hansen and a center that isn't terrible, we're beginning see why the Canucks were so high on him. Speaking of yeomanly, I once played that word in a game of Scrabble. Huge points. Look out, Tanner. I'm coming for you.
  
  
• That kid from the tunnel who hit Luongo in the face (#headpokekid) is obviously good luck. Here's my proposal: Fly him to Vancouver, give him season's tickets, and let himsmear his grubby hands all over our starting goaltender before games. Apart from when Luongo comes down with weird kid sicknesses like chicken pox, head lice, mono, and whooping cough, we'll be unstoppable.
  
  
• In the faceoff circle, Manny Malhotra went 15-5 last night. You've likely heard this stat elsewhere last night, as faceoffs only ever seem to get talked about when Alternate Captain Mal has a good night. Also of note: of Malhotra's 20 draws, none were in the offensive zone, and 13 were defensive zone faceoffs. The rest of the team, collectively, took nine behind their blue line. Henrik had a rough night, only winning 5-of-15, but he took seven of the Canucks eleven offensive zone draws. There is an interesting, unwritten article about zone faceoffs, the Canucks uniquely multi-faceted faceoff trio, and Vigneault's personnel preferences. One day PITB will write it.
  
  
• The best defenseman on the ice last night: Christian Ehrhoff. I noticed him on every shift, and since he played 23:15, it was a whole lot of noticing. Ehrhoff played with a grit I've never seen and an intensity I've never seen. He even stood up for Luongo when Toews got in his crease. When has Christian Ehrhoff ever done that? On the offensive end, it was his excellent transitional work that led to the Henrik Sedin goal, and his seeing-eye wrist shot that buried the Blackhawks on the powerplay. Ehrhoff had been playing a bit spotty of late, and I was beginning to hear concerning murmurs about which Canuck defenseman was on the block. But, if Ehrhoff can play like he did last night on a regular basis, he'll be beyond invaluable.
  
  
• Keith "Hips" Ballard only played 12:45 last night, but he registered 6 blocked shots and 4 hits in that time, including one big hip check on Tomas Kopecky. Ballard appears to be finding his legs, which is more than I can say for Lady Helen Port-Huntley. In fact, the whole defense corps is rounding into form. It's about time.
  
  
• Speaking of blocked shots, the Canucks had 19 last night. Couple that with Luongo's 32 saves and you can see why the Blackhawks and their fans left frustrated. Add that to the 9 missed, and you've got 60 shots directed at the Canucks net and nothing to show for it.
  
  
• I loved Chris Cuthbert's call last night, especially when he was complaining about how many players on the Hawks had names that began with the letter B (Bolland, Boynton, Brouwer, Bickell). Cuthbert: "It's like they drafted alphabetically for four years."
  
  
• I talked yesterday about Ryan Kesler as the team's top powerplay skater. He is the catalyst for this powerplay goal, as he gets the winger win on the faceoff, and then gets to the net quickly for a perfect screen. While he doesn't get a point out of it, this one's all Kesler.
  
  
• And finally: can I gush over the many set plays the Sedins and Alex Burrows have? We all know about the one they do off the faceoff, but how about their lob pass for the breakout? We see this work for a scoring chance--usually a 2-on-1 or a breakaway--about once a game. Here it results in a goal when Patrick Sharp takes the shift off, and Henrik glides in alone to clean up Daniel Sedin's rebound.
  

I Watched This Game: Canucks vs. Blackhawks, November 20, 2010

Canucks 1 - 7 Blackhawks

Vancouver played tonight with a degree of poorness that I can only partially explain. Apparently misinformed about what was supposed to happen tonight, the Canucks showed up for a slumber party. Then, undeterred by the fact that their guests were playing ice hockey, our boys decided to go to sleep anyway. When they awoke, they were being soundly embarrassed by a Chicago team you'd think they would have gotten up to play.

But they did not get up; they slept. And unfortunately, both PITB and the Chicago Blackhawks were wide awake the whole time, thinking they must be dreaming when it became apparent how easily the Canucks were going to let this one go. Ugh. Yuck. Blech. We watched this game:

• I've talked in the past about how the Canucks' defense is in complete disarray, and it showed tonight. Bieksa was getting all the blame at the Forum Sports Bar (where we watched the game with fellow bloggers), but this monstrosity was a team effort. Every defenseman finished minus-2 or worse. I was remarking, on the drive home, about how nobody on the back-end is playing in their established position of strength from last year. Everybody's playing the wrong side, with the wrong type of partner. It's maddening.

• An example: in the absence of Sami Salo, Christian Ehrhoff has been asked to become the Sedins' third passing option, but he's much better playing off the rush with Kesler and Raymond. His blueline pinching isn't as heady, and his choices aren't as sound. Furthermore, he's not receiving the twins' passes cleanly even when he does it right. In the Every Goal series, I detailed how many of his goals came with the second line. He's better there. This is just one of many examples of how the defense can't seem to find a groove.

• The problem with Ehrhoff's struggles is that they affect everyone else--most notably, Kevin Bieksa, who has effectively become our no. 2 defenseman. He began the game paired with Alex Edler. Bieksa is better at pinching and keeping the Sedins' cycle game alive, and since Ehrhoff isn't scoring, Vigneault's been using Bieksa as the defenseman on the ice with Hank and Danny. The problem is that Bieksa isn't a two-way defenseman; he's a one-way defenseman that can go both ways. If he's focused on defense, he doesn't play offense, and if he's focused on offense, the puck is going into somebody's net. He seems to be playing unsure of how he's playing. But that goes for most of the defenders.

• Even Dan Hamhuis is playing poorly, and he started off the year playing so well. His foot injury came at a terrible time, and it's clearly still bothering him. It's frustrating because it's been long enough now since he's been playing well that fans are beginning to wonder if he ever was. He was. He's no has-been. He might again.

• It's hecka easy to complain after a night like tonight, so let's rag on the Sedins. Shocking pronouncement: they're underperforming. Don't let their impressive point totals, uh, impress you. The Sedins are scoring, but they're not getting any sustained offensive pressure. The problem with that is that if you can't hem your opponent in the offensive zone, the party's coming to your house. The Canucks' strength over the past few seasons has been 5-on-5 play (remember the LA series, where they outplayed the Kings 5-on-5 drastically) , but that strength is borne from two lines that cycle the puck and retain possession. The Sedins used to do it the best. Not so much lately. They're still scoring, but the puck is coming back to the defensive zone far too quickly, and that's putting too much pressure on a defensive unit that can't handle it right now. People said the Sedins were invisible tonight, and they were. But they're invisible on nights when they score if they can't establish their cycle game and eat the clock with sustained pressure.

• People were taking shots at Henrik for being a poor captain tonight. Is this fair? Here's my thinking: if we're seeing evidence that wearing the C for the Canucks makes you play worse, we should give it to Peter Schaefer. Nobody will notice. Or better yet, give it to the other team's captain, so he'll play really terribly against us.

• I was relieved when Luongo got pulled and Schneider played just as poorly. Thank you, Cory, for your part in mitigating the potential goaltending controversy. That's just teamwork. When nobody's playing well, it's best to go with the flow.

• The good news is that Luongo usually plays fabulously in the game after he gets pulled, so we should expect a win tonight in Phoenix. I was thinking to myself: if he plays so well after getting yanked, the Canucks should yank him in games before big games, so he'll win them. In fact, they should just yank him all the time, even when he's not playing. On off days, Vigneault or Melanson should call him and tell him he just got the hook so he'll play well next game.

• You know things are going awfully when people's expectations have been so tempered they're just praying the Canucks don't get shut out. Samuelsson's goal was a little like salvaging three hubcaps from a totalled car. It's completely meaningless, but it's something. And good on Ryan Kesler, the only Canuck who didn't finish the game in the minuses, for the inside-outside move he made to get that scoring chance. He was the best Canuck tonight.

• I wrote myself a letter before the game asking my future self to come back in the time machine he invents (that's happening), to warn me if the Canucks were going to get whooped. I thought we were going to win tonight because I didn't show. That said, it was probably for the best that Future Harrison stayed away. I was actually planning to murder him and steal the credit for his work. Know thyself.

• There were green children at tonight's game. The green men have reproduced, and this merits a discussion. We know there are green women after one appeared on CBC last postseason and Ron Maclean told her to take her top off. But, despite being gendered, green people are without sex organs, so how do they reproduce? I suggest asexually. Green men are like earthworms. It's possible, in fact, that one of them is actually Earthworm Jim and the green spandex is actually his next generation robotic suit.

• There is good news: the garbage play from the whole team meant Alain Vigneault could play his fourth line more. That's a minor victory, right? More ice time for Tanner Glass?

• Poor Joel Perrault was probably sitting on the bench thinking, Oh man, I am so gonna get blamed for this.

• More good news: a loss like this, at home, might be the wake-up call the Canucks need. They were bad on the road trip, but they were also playing poorly before that, when they were winning. The excuses (road trips, winning) have been quietly filtering out the evidence that they're in a genuine slump. It's patently clear now. Let's hope they get things turned around before we find ourselves in a situation where they're playing well and losing.

• And finally: how many goals do you think Alex Burrows is capable of netting this season? He has one so far. Richard Loat (@mozy19) believes he won't even hit 20. I'm not sure either. My concern is that Burrows spent two seasons in a golden zone, and this shoulder injury might knock him back to earth. My concern is that injecting a bum shoulder into the equation is a little bit like when Earth, Wind and Fire brought elements of disco to the funk.

• That last joke, translated for a non-black audience: my concern is that injecting a bum shoulder into the equation is a little bit like when John Lennon brought Yoko Ono to the Beatles. Also, The Mentalist. White people like The Mentalist, right?

I Watched This Game: Canucks at Blackhawks, October 20, 2010

Canucks 1 - 2 Blackhawks (Shootout)

I really hate the shootout. That said, I don't hate it for the reasons you think. The reason I hate the shootout is that it completely negates the facts of the game, and instead turns tomorrow's headline into a matter of wins and losses. The Canucks played well enough to win tonight and lost in the post-game coin toss. All the talk will be about their winless road record and their losing skid, but this one really shouldn't count. They deserved the two points. Unfortunately, they only got one point. It was hard-earned as all Hell, but it's one point shy of satisfying the fan's need for blood.

• Unlike the fans, who were out for blood they did not fully get, Daniel Sedin continues to reap the rewards of liquid envy. His goal tonight ties him for the league lead with Marian Hossa, and extends his 82-goal pace. Can he keep this up? No. Certainly not. But, bringing in the numbers from last season, we can see that Daniel has scored 17 goals in his last 17 regular season games. So maybe he can keep this up.
• Speaking of blood, was it just me, or was this game oddly devoid of bad blood? It was a very fluid and very clean game. It was lovely to watch, but didn't satisfy my bloodlust, like ice dancing.
• Still on blood: as much as I hate him, Jonathan Toews is a pretty tough nut. He took a puck right in the teeth, then casually skated to the bench like he needed to reapply his deodorant. There we saw he was bleeding profusely from the mouth. No big deal. He just broke his face. Whatever.
• I really wish Dan Hamhuis had played tonight, as the Kevin Bieksa-Ryan Parent pairing is more terrifying than the hallways of the Overlook Hotel (warning: clip terrifying). While they were both much better than last night, they got caught behind the play more times than they should have. Both of them gave Marian Hossa a breakaway tonight. That can't happen.
• More on Bieksa: It's gotten to a point with defensive breakdowns where I immediately check to see if it was him, and too often, it is. Tonight I officially decided I just don't like him. Every good thing he brings is offset by something detrimental. Skeeter is much more reasonable about these things than I am, so expect us to argue all season about it.
• One thing I do love about Kevin Bieksa is his gloved push-punch. He does it all the time. He and Tomas Kopecky were taking whacks at each other at every stoppage, and I saw Juice pull off a couple of cool, little jabs. Not cool, though, was an instance during the first period when Kopecky faked a slash to Bieksa's head. That's unsportsmanlike.
• Also unsportsmanlike: businesswomen.
• In tight checking games like this, it's impossible to miss what Manny Malhotra brings to this team. His stick-checking was impeccable. His faceoffs were glorious, as usual, as he was 14-for-20 in the circle. He led the Canucks to a perfect penalty kill, too. There was one instance when he came out of the defensive zone with the puck, and rather than icing it, he skated gingerly, through the neutral zone, backing the defense off before taking a slapshot on Turco. It killed ten to fifteen seconds that simply icing the puck would not have.
• Aaron Rome has increased his invisibility, which is to say he played a good game tonight. I'd prefer if he played less, but probably so would the Canucks medical staff.
• We forgot to mention this last game, but is Raffi Torres capable of making a simple pass? Every time he passes the puck, it's some complicated abortion of a pass that very rarely makes it to its intended target. There was one instance tonight where he could have chipped the puck off the glass, but instead, he feathered it across the ice in the defensive zone. The margin for error there is not unlike the distance between the earth and sun. One degree in either direction and everybody's dead. He does this far too often.
• It appears Alain Vigneault reads Pass it to Bulis, as the second line was finally reunited, just like we told him to. Sadly, the Raymond-Kesler-Samuelsson line didn't keep, primarily because Jannik Hansen played so badly on the top line Samuelsson had to be returned to it. However, when they were together they were good, creating chances and space. They had 11 shots between them.
• Though he led the team in shots tonight with five, Samuelsson suddenly appears hesitant to shoot. I never thought I'd say this, but he's holding on to the puck for too long.
• I found it interesting that the Canuck players had no idea they'd been selected for the shootout. It's a weird way to go about it, but it almost worked. I think it's safe to say that Daniel Sedin has earned his way onto the shootout shortlist with the sick move he pulled off on Turco.
• Roberto Luongo was fantastic tonight. He made several key saves, including a few breakaways. Unfortunately, he couldn't squeeze the puck in the shootout, and two trickled in after everybody thought he'd made the save. I haven't felt such intense excitement followed by shame since this dance I went to in the eighth grade.
• Know who wasn't nearly as good tonight? Cory Schneider. He didn't stop a single shot.
• Before you snicker at the shortsighted line of thinking above, consider that it's the same way this "goaltending controversy" started in the first place: opinions based on one game. Now that Luongo has played a good game, I imagine we'll put the controversy talk to bed. At least until the next time Schneider does his job as the backup and wins the game he's given.

The Game's Best Defensemen Are Always Here

Duncan Keith is pretty good. He is always here.

Vancouver Canucks fans are raw about the 2010 playoffs. They're raw because we lost to the Chicago Blackhawks--again, and because we lost in such a spectacular way: the profligate defense, the bankrupt penalty kill, the bedraggled goaltending... Pavol Demitra... Vancouver Canucks fans are raw because we thought we were better, that we deserved better. But here's the thing: we were treated to something incredible special during those playoffs--something that no other team can brag: we got to watch Drew Doughty and Duncan Keith destroy us for twelve games.

It was magical.

It's often hard to notice a good defenseman, primarily because a good defenseman doesn't make mistakes, and defenders primarily get noticed when they're beaten. NHL defense is subtle and fluid, remarkably so at the elite level. This is excepting the prodigous ones, the defensemen so good they can't help but stand out every moment they're on the ice. Duncan Keith and Drew Doughty? These guys basically glow. They do things no other defensemen can do, and you have to notice because you never see it. What's more, they do it at high-speed, with a mind-boggling grace and ease. They rush the puck like all-star forwards, they backcheck at lightning speed, they run a seamless power play, they possess the puck like no one else, and they dig the puck out of the boards while being completely unhittable.

Think about it: how many times did Duncan Keith swivel around and retrieve a Canuck dump-in? How many times did you scream, "Hit him!" only to discover the puck was already out, the 'Hawks were in transition, and the Vancouver offense was behind an odd-man rush. Duncan Keith was blink-and-you-missed it incredible all series long, and you saw it because you were exposed to him for six games.

What blows me away is that Drew Doughty was arguably better. We hated him more, because he singlehandedly carried that Kings team. In retrospect, who but Doughty made any noise at all? Other Kings scored, sure, but only Doughty made us clench our fists and pray to the hockey gods he passed the puck to someone less brilliant, less prodigous.

Keith, Doughty, it was a treat to see these guys, to have such a long, in-depth look at what makes them the best defensemen in the game. This article is to ensure that we appreciate this. Sure, one of them beat us, and the other nearly did all by himself, but despite our bias, let us understand that Duncan Keith and Drew Doughty, the Sidney Crosby and Alexander Ovechkin of NHL defensemen, treated us to something rare.

People talk about how the biggest problem with the Canucks is that we don't have an elite defenseman. We look at Doughty, Keith, and Weber, and we shake our heads, saying, "why don't we have one of those?"

I think our petty jealously blinds us to how truly jealous we should actually be.

These guys don't grow on trees. They're generational talents. Rather than demand Gillis gets us one, which is unlikely considering it would be like Gillis finding a Dragon Ball, we should bask in their rare and special greatness every time they come to town. In fact, I'm getting tired of hearing about how all the stars are in the Eastern Conference. No they aren't. Crosby and Ovechkin are. After that, it's a dead heat offensively (they have Stamkos, Gaborik, Backstrom, we have Sedin, Thornton, Kane) and defensively, we have everyone. Shea Weber, Drew Doughty, Duncan Keith, Brent Seabrook, Nicklas Lidstrom, Scott Neidermayer. These are guys that can control an entire NHL game from the backend and control it in a way that is visible to the average hockey fan. Who in the Eastern Conference does that? Zdeno Chara, maybe? Chris Pronger? Maybe when motivated. Not every night, that's for sure.

As Canuck fans and as Westerners we should take stock of the privilege we have to watch The Sedins every night, to watch Keith and Doughty multiple times each year, and potentially see them up close and personal over a seven-game playoff series. We need to stop complaining about how the East doesn't care about us, how our geographical plight prevents us from seeing the game's stars. It's not true. During the 09-10 season, we got downright sick of seeing the game's best defensemen. We were spoiled.

Fun with Letters to the Editor: Blackhawks Whinging Edition

As a subscriber to The Hockey News, I get the digital issues delivered by e-mail before they hit the shelves. A letter in the upcoming August 2nd issue caught my eye. Mr. Scott Saxton of Lasalle, Ontario, has a rather, shall we say, innovative solution the Chicago Blackhawks off-season woes. Follow along with me!

I hate the NHL salary cap. I am not a Blackhawks fan, but what is happening to their club frustrates me as a hockey fan.

Strong words to start off with. The NHL salary cap certainly has its flaws, as has been adequately proven by the Ilya Kovalchuk fiasco of the past couple weeks, but clearly, Mr. Saxton has his eye specifically on the dismantling of the Blackhawks’ Stanley Cup winning roster that has seen Byfuglien, Ladd, Versteeg, and others all shipped out of town.

The NHL should reward greatness and allow it to run its course. The salary cap only serves to dismantle progress and promote athletic communism.

Wait, athletic communism? Clearly we have leapt from the foothills of discourse into the lofty peaks of gross hyperbole. Even in the post-salary-cap NHL there are the haves and the have-nots. And yet, a team like the Nashville Predators continues to perform better than teams with significantly higher payrolls, such as the New York Rangers or Minnesota Wild.

And no one seems to be advocating “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need,” or else we might get some bizarre attempts from second-tier NHL players attempting to establish their need for a comically oversized diamond ring as if they were factory workers in Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged.”

Why punish the clubs who excel and get it right? Why not reward them?

Yes, let’s reward the Blackhawks for the absurd contracts they gave to Cristobal Huet and Brian Campbell, the ones that necessitated shipping out so many players. Huet, after all, played such an integral part of the ‘Hawks Stanley Cup run, earning every penny of that $5.625 million contract. And those bonus-laden contracts given out to so many of their young stars, giving them a carry-over cap penalty of $4.2 million is completely an example of a team “get[ting] it right.”

Example: the Stanley Cup champion could get an exemption to exceed the salary cap by $5 million during the season of their defense.

You know, like the Blackhawks did last season when they won the Cup, essentially exceeding the cap by $4.2 million in bonuses.

And really, nothing says dynasty like allowing a team an unfair competitive advantage.

This would allow them to re-sign integral parts or even further bolster a championship-caliber team. Don’t think this idea has legs?

This idea has many things, but definitely not legs. Maybe a couple armpits and half a buttcheek.

Well, at least let’s get this conversation going.

Let’s not.

Something must be done.

Something was done. The Chicago Blackhawks fired Dale Tallon.

The NHL is in the entertainment business. Watching a whole slew of middling teams slog it out each spring to see who is the best of a homogenous bunch is not entertaining.

Personally, I appreciate that the salary cap forces teams to get creative with how they build a team. With the salary cap, you can’t just fling contracts indiscriminately at free agents anymore, as if you were building a house by tossing a bunch of bricks in a pile and hoping for the best. Of course, that doesn’t stop some general managers, but building a team in the new NHL requires intelligence, foresight, and a solid plan. Dale Tallon demonstrated none of these things.

We want to see greatness. We want to see champions. The last team standing doesn’t necessarily give us this.

And yet, year after year, the San Jose Sharks have been on top of the Western Conference, the Red Wings have competed for the Stanley Cup, the Washington Capitals have exerted regular season dominance, and the Pittsburgh Penguins keep pissing off the rest of the NHL by being good, allowing for more marketing of Sidney Crosby.

Heck, even the Chicago Blackhawks have managed to keep their top-six forward unit intact this off-season, still have a formidable top-four defensive corps, and are a waive of Huet away from being neatly under the salary cap again.

Again, the reason the Blackhawks have had deal out their Stanley Cup winning team like a deck of cards isn’t because the salary cap is bad for certain values of badness; it’s because Dale Tallon gave out some terrible contracts while he was a GM. Huet was paid $5.625 million to be a backup goalie last season and Campbell was paid $7.14 million to be the third defenceman.

Don’t cry for the Chicago Blackhawks, Scott. They got what they paid for: one year with Lord Stanley. And only one.

Sharks Sign Niklas Hjalmarsson to Offer Sheet

Enough basketball. Here's some hockey news for you, from TSN.ca:


"The San Jose Sharks have signed Blackhawks restricted free agent defenceman Niklas Hjalmarsson to a free agent offer sheet, signing the defenceman to a four-year, $14 million dollar contract.

Chicago has seven days to match the offer. If the team does not match it, they will receive San Jose's first and third round picks in the 2011 NHL entry draft."

Whoa! I don't feel bad for Chicago, because they just won the Stanley Cup, but this has to hurt for the fans, watching a young team that could have been a dynasty just get picked apart, piece by piece. And for those saying Dale Tallon over in Florida is a tiny god, keep in mind that he is the one who mismanaged the player salaries and timing of contract renewals, as well as overspent in free agency so perfectly as to allow this to happen. And that is why he's no longer with the Blackhawks.

Byfuglien Trade Has Glorious Karmic Factor

Short post, but I had to get something off my chest. I detest Dustin Byfuglien. As hockey players go, he's the scum of the earth. Is this a rivalry thing? Not really. Here's the thing: I believe it is beyond disrespectful to taunt the fans of your opponent when you score. And don't get me wrong. I'm no Don Cherry. Celebrate with your teammates--celebrate flamboyantly, even--but celebrate with your teammates. Don't celebrate as a show for the fans who, with that goal, you deflated and devastated. Don't revel in breaking their hearts. Revel in your success with the others that helped make it possible. I lost any respect I had for Dustin Byfuglien, even as the frustratingly talented nemesis of my team, when he taunted the fans of Vancouver. I was further incensed when he did the same to the fans in Buffalo. I wished all manner of harm upon him.

So it was, with unbridled glee, that I celebrated the news last week that he had been traded, in a massive deal, to the armpit of the hockey world, Atlanta. First of all, being traded apparently sucks, and I always sympathize for the players. But, in this case, it couldn't happen to a nicer guy. where he will be expected to replace Ilya Kovalchuk and fail hilariously, be called out for having an albatross of a contract, forced to play with players that are not Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews, and deal with terrible management. All of these things, in themselves, are wonderful.

But the most wonderful is the karmic factor. Look at these attendance numbers: nobody goes to games in Atlanta. They were third-worst in attendance last year. This year, without Kovalchuk, they are likely to drop a space or two. Byfuglien will be playing in an empty arena. What better justice for a player who systematically disrespects fans who pay to watch him play than to take those fans away. I am giddy.

I Didn't Watch This Game: Canucks vs. Blackhawks, May 11, 2010

It's true. I play guitar in a band and we have a show coming up, so I was busy practicing while the game was on. Harrison PVRed the game (he also had a practice with his band) and we intended to watch the game together, but the combination of exhaustion and depression kept us from doing so.

It feels like a kick in the chest right now, to have my hometeam that I care so much about out of the playoffs. I'll have more to say as a postmortem later on, but right now I'm just upset. Harrison and I will likely watch the game tonight and collect our thoughts on the season as a whole.

PiTB will continue. We're enjoying blogging and we hope you're enjoying reading. We'll hopefully be doing some video blogging to go with the writing and you might see some musical tributes to our beloved Canucks in the future. For now, let's just have a moment of silence for the '09-'10 Vancouver Canucks.

I Watched This Game: Canucks vs. Blackhawks, May 9, 2010

I Watched This Game is a recurring feature on Pass it to Bulis!, chronicling the observations and insights of two people who watched a hockey game.


My sincerest apologies for the delinquency of the previous I Watched This Game feature, which should have followed the Blackhawks 7-4 drubbing of our Vancouver Canucks. It wasn't so much that I didn't want to do it after such a sour loss; it wasn't so much that it was my anniversary this weekend and I didn't have the time; it wasn't even that the game was so similar to the one before it that the insights would have been identical; it was, well, all of those things.

But let's not dwell on the distant past, where we lost a couple of games by a wider margin than even the score would suggest. Let's dwell on the recent past, where the team gutted out an impressive road win and sent the series back to a game six:

• First things first: Sami's testicle. I'm sure, by now, you've seen the video, tweeted about it, and cringed along with the rest of the province. Everybody has. In fact, since last night when I made the quick post about it, PiTB has received over 6000 hits, which is more than the entire blog had received up to that point. People care about Sami's gonads. I don't have an update for you, but let me point out that when men in the media talk about putting it all on the line, they usually whisper in their hearts, "except for balls." Balls are generally exempt from the line; no one expects you to put them on it.

• My wife: Salo's got so much heart. As a ghost, he could have let the puck go right through him, but he didn't, for the good of the team. Yes, what a guy. Okay, anyway, the rest of the team.

• How about the play of Kyle Wellwood these past few games? Wellwood's been the best player on the ice since game 2, and he earned himself a third star nomination last night for his 2 assist game. Wellwood has been bearing down (what?), winning puck battles along the boards (what?) and throwing hits (WHAT?) all series and it's paying off. Wellwood's play earned him a compliment from Hughson, who talked about the Canucks' depth at center. (An Art Ross winner, a Selke candidate, and dependable ol' Kyle Wellwood.) A month or two ago and that would have been a punchline. Good on ya, Welly.

• I should point out that Wellwood always tends to play great when the team plays terribly, and vice versa, as though he's playing a different game entirely. As we often assert here on PiTB, Wellwood is weird. That's all the explanation I've got.

• The difference between the last two games and this one? Roberto Luongo's rebound control. When he swallows up pucks, it slows the game down, takes away momentum, and gives the team confidence. When he spits out rebounds, well, we lose. It's that simple. He needs two more games like that one. Can he do that?

• Shane O'Brien has sure taken his lumps over these playoffs. He's been called a clown on numerous occasions now. In the last two months, every member of the media has taken a shot at him, and every opposing player has had something to say about him. This is a bottom-pairing defenseman, you guys. Let us remember this. SOB has been a great story, and he's going to need to be even better with Salo out. He's shown flashes. We need even more.

• Game six is at home, where the Canucks are 2-3 in this postseason. Were they not the best home team during the regular season? Let's hope that's the Canucks' team we see on Tuesday night. If it is, I've got a good feeling about the outcome of this series. If it isn't, I've got a good feeling about the Phoenix Suns.
  

• The secret to the Canucks' power play? Shots from the point. Heck, the secret to everything is shots from the point. What's inside the Ark of the Covenant? Shots from the point. I especially liked Kevin Bieksa's PP goal, as it came on a one-timer. How many one-timers have the Canucks flubbed this postseason with passes that weren't crisp? One crisp d-to-d pass and it finds its way past Niema. More, please.

• Am I the only one finding Kelly Hrudey completely intolerable? He says some of the stupidest things and then stubbornly refuses to hear the other side. I fully expect "I don't care--whales are fish" to come out of his mouth soon. Between him, Milbury and the ever-slipping Ron Maclean, it's like a black hole of good content between periods.

• Good to see the Blackhawks taking the dumb penalties they've been deserving of. Byfuglien, Toews, Hossa, Bolland, Ladd, Eager... these guys have been slashing, running the goalie, clutching, grabbing, and hitting after the whistle without any calls coming their way. Finally, however, in game five, we got a few. Why? Composure. The Canucks kept their heads and it became apparent who was starting everything

• Speaking of composure, there is no better example than when Andrew Ladd punched SOB right in his temporary stitches, and The Gun Show didn't go ballistic. I would have gone ballistic. I would have been suspended for the rest of the series for how I woud have reacted. That was classless and cowardly. The word in Maple Ridge is even Ladd's mother wasn't too proud of that one. Happy mother's day, Mrs. Ladd--your son's a little puke.

• Instead of only railing on Blackhawks all day, however, I'd like to point out that Jonathan Toews and Duncan Keith are incredible. The Canucks have been dumping the puck into Keith's corner and trying to get a hit in, and it hasn't happened once, because the little bugger is so shifty. That's incredible. And Toews leads the playoffs in scoring, which surprised me. I thought Crosby had about eighty-one points by now. Nope, it's Toews. These are excellent players.

• Michael Grabner has been impressive, has he not? The guy's a player for sure, and his speed caught the Blackhawks off guard two or three times for good scoring chances. Let's hope he pots one tomorrow night. In my mind, he's due.

• Can you believe Mats Sundin spent a season playing with Luongo and still doesn't know the proper pronunciation of his last name? Lalongo? Come on, man. Well, you know what they say: you can take the hockey player out of Toronto, but you can't take the Toronto out of the hockey player. Nah, they never say that.
  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Skeeter watched this game as well:

• The Canucks put a lot of pressure on the points when Chicago was in the offensive zone, limiting the shots from the point, which is one of the reasons Luongo didn't give up as many ugly rebounds: fewer shots through traffic = fewer junky rebounds in front of the net. It's not coincidence that the 'Hawks one goal was scored from the point when Henrik and Burrows got their wires crossed and neither one pressured the shooter.

• Yes, Kyle Wellwood played an excellent game, as Harrison pointed out, but what was especially fascinating to me is that he was on the ice for the most crucial time of the game: when the Canucks were up 3-1 at the end of the third and the 'Hawks pulled Niemi for the extra attacker. He was on the ice from 18:07 until 19:15, when Burrows scored the empty netter (from a Wellwood assist, natch). Ostensibly it was for faceoff insurance, but I think it speaks more to how much AV trusts Wellwood defensively. Look for a post later today on the burgeoning defensive abilities of Kyle Wellwood.

• Ryan Johnson only lost one faceoff last night. He was 89% in the faceoff circle. Henrik won 63% of his faceoffs, one of which led directly to a goal. On the other hand, Patrick Sharp and Dave Bolland were brutal at 36% and 15% respectively. When it's not called "hockey," possession is the name of the game.

• Surprisingly, with Salo out after the first period due to ball-distress (now will it burn when he pees?), it wasn't Ehrhoff who was the big minute-muncher. That honor goes to Edler and Bieksa, who played 27:23 and 27:04 respectively.

• According to the Team 1040, the story of the game was Luongo shaving his beard and refusing to talk to the media on game day. That's a pretty lame story.

• Big credit to Shane O'Brien for not even missing a shift after he was turned into a blood unicorn by an errant high stick. He played a solid 19:29 in the absence of Salo and was a +2. If Salo is out next game, SOB will be called upon to play bigger minutes, especially with Alberts only playing 10:38 with no extra shifts after Salo left the game.