GDT: Blackhawks @ Lightning 6:00 PM (CT) NBCSCH

[BobbyJet]

Only had time for 9 min long highlights, but fwiw 95% of the chances shown that Tampa got were against Keith and Murphy.

Most in ice time I assume and probably matchups play a part, but that's something that really jumped off. Nothing shown against Mitchell/Zadorov and maybe one or two against Boqvist/de Haan.

Another thing that was a clear theme is how we still have trouble cleaning out guys in front of our net, and get overwhelmed. But that's the usual stuff unfortunately.

Other than that it looks like we were competitive again and right there, but lost it on a few weak plays. Sounds about right?

It was like a bad joke that TB could (ahem, accidentally) run over Lankinen any time they felt like it. And then stand around the crease with no resistance from Hawk players in the vicinity - who instead were all puck watching and leaving Lankinen on his own. It's no wonder some Hawks fans seem to want to take physicality out of the game.

 

[Pez68]

It was like a bad joke that TB could (ahem, accidentally) run over Lankinen any time they felt like it. And then stand around the crease with no resistance from Hawk players in the vicinity - who instead were all puck watching and leaving Lankinen on his own. It's no wonder some Hawks fans seem to want to take physicality out of the game.

Lol......

 

[RememberTheRoar]

It was like a bad joke that TB could (ahem, accidentally) run over Lankinen any time they felt like it. And then stand around the crease with no resistance from Hawk players in the vicinity - who instead were all puck watching and leaving Lankinen on his own. It's no wonder some Hawks fans seem to want to take physicality out of the game.

I don’t, that’s a weird generalization.

I’ve been complaining about the Hawks not clearing killorn or Hornqvist away from Lankinen the last few weeks as well.

 

[Pez68]

I don’t, that’s a weird generalization.

I’ve been complaining about the Hawks not clearing killorn or Hornqvist away from Lankinen the last few weeks as well.

It's a really stupid statement.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

It's a really stupid statement.

He just likes to pretend he’s the last guy standing up for the way the game used to be played. Likes thinking we’re all just a bunch of soft little babies.

 

[BobbyJet]

He just likes to pretend he’s the last guy standing up for the way the game used to be played. Likes thinking we’re all just a bunch of soft little babies.

"Used to be played"??
Other than that part, your statement is pretty accurate. I guess Hawks being out of the playoffs lately has affected the way some folks think this game is played at crunch time.
And if you folks are fine with Lankinen being run over several times like he was last evening by a rather mild-mannered TB squad then I don't know what to say, other than my previous "stupid" statement.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

"Used to be played"??
Other than that part, your statement is pretty accurate. I guess Hawks being out of the playoffs lately has affected the way some folks think this game is played at crunch time.
And if you folks are fine with Lankinen being run over several times like he was last evening by a rather mild-mannered TB squad then I don't know what to say, other than my previous "stupid" statement.

I’m not fine with Lankinen being run over, not sure why you’re generalizing as if you’re from some other era of hockey and that none of us understand what you do.

 

[BobbyJet]

I’m not fine with Lankinen being run over, not sure why you’re generalizing as if you’re from some other era of hockey and that none of us understand what you do.

So, why is it that so few folks here ever mention Hawks charmin play? And when I do I get comments like yours above?

 

[deytookerjaabs]

Charmin?

Didn't Murphy send a bomb on a Tampa player a few weeks ago, how about Duncs slewfoot?

I'm sure they took a number. While I'm okay with that goal in theory, the dude skated in a manner that gave him no choice other than to run through the 'net dead on into Lankinen and it was a hell of a hit with the guy deep in his crease.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

So, why is it that so few folks here ever mention Hawks charmin play? And when I do I get comments like yours above?

I don’t know, I don’t speak for everyone. I’m taking exception to you making a generalization about everyone here, and that it seems a bit condescending.

I often mention my dislike for soft play. I’ve also said how I under appreciated Kane during the cups because I much preferred the play of Hossa and Toews then.

 

[BobbyJet]

Charmin?

Didn't Murphy send a bomb on a Tampa player a few weeks ago, how about Duncs slewfoot?

I'm sure they took a number. While I'm okay with that goal in theory, the dude skated in a manner that gave him no choice other than to run through the 'net dead on into Lankinen and it was a hell of a hit on that with the guy deep in his crease.

That's right. He had no intention of avoiding our goalie and with no response whatsoever from Hawks, he'd do it again in a heartbeat. And that wasn't the only incident. With the game tied, TB spent the entire 3rd period running into the blue paint unimpeded.

 

[deytookerjaabs]

That's right. He had no intention of avoiding our goalie and with no response whatsoever from Hawks, he'd do it again in a heartbeat. And that wasn't the only incident. With the game tied, TB spent the entire 3rd period running into the blue paint unimpeded.

True, you don't just skate out there and hammer people to a pulp anymore right after the incident, in that sense the whole game has changed.

But, like I said, they probably took a number on that and if the guy has his head down at some point in the right spot he might get one to remember, or forget.

 

[BobbyJet]

True, you don't just skate out there and hammer people to a pulp anymore right after the incident, in that sense the whole game has changed.

But, like I said, they probably took a number on that and if the guy has his head down at some point in the right spot he might get one to remember, or forget.

Right
In my mind, because Colton was obviously going to make contact with Lankinen the goal should not be counted. Technically, the puck entered the net before the contact was made however the failure to avoid contact rule needs to be clarified. It's ridiculous that a guy can barrel into the goalie like that and score (regardless of when he actually makes contact).

 

[deytookerjaabs]

Technically, the puck entered the net before the contact was made however the failure to avoid contact rule needs to be clarified. It's ridiculous that a guy can barrel into the goalie like that and score (regardless of when he actually makes contact).

Yes, when it comes to protecting the guy in 'net like the league claims to do you'd think there'd be discipline. The bar is low.

 

[BobbyJet]

Yes, when it comes to protecting the guy in 'net like the league claims to do you'd think there'd be discipline. The bar is low.

What's more ridiculous is that if Colton failed to score on the play he may have been penalized for running the goalie... but because he scored, the contact gets ignored.

It's always been that goalies are largely unprotected by refs and it is why players take matters into their own hands .... even in today's game, depending on who is on the ice at the time.

 

[Pez68]

It should have been a penalty. I mean, I guess the goal counts because the puck went in before he ran over Lankinen... But it should have been a penalty after the fact.

NHL officiating is terrible.

 

[Larmer83]

NHL.com - The National Hockey League

In all cases in which an attacking player initiates other than incidental contact with a goalkeeper, whether or not the goalkeeper is inside or outside the goal crease, and whether or not a goal is scored, the offensive player will receive a penalty (minor or major, as the Referee deems appropriate). See also Rule 47(c) -- Charging).

 

[RememberTheRoar]

NHL.com - The National Hockey League

In all cases in which an attacking player initiates other than incidental contact with a goalkeeper, whether or not the goalkeeper is inside or outside the goal crease, and whether or not a goal is scored, the offensive player will receive a penalty (minor or major, as the Referee deems appropriate). See also Rule 47(c) -- Charging).

Seems like textbook charging of the goaltender. If that shit is allowed, the Hawks should just have Zadorov run every team’s goalie with the puck on his stick.

 

[BobbyJet]

Anyone watching the Calgary/Toronto game tonight?

Hockey as it was meant to be played. Mean. Games are getting intense already and we just passed the half-way mark of the RS.

 

[SimpleJack]

True, you don't just skate out there and hammer people to a pulp anymore right after the incident, in that sense the whole game has changed.

But, like I said, they probably took a number on that and if the guy has his head down at some point in the right spot he might get one to remember, or forget.

IMO....the game should be about skill and talent. The physical element gets taken too far, people get hurt, and then there needs to be retaliation, and then someone else gets hurt....its just stupid. Why do people like that sort of stuff? The game is physical enough as is, fast paced and intense. All that added stuff(like lining up a guy with his head down) i personally have never been a fan of. I know, i know...."keep your head up"....and "its always been that way, used to be much worse".....well, I just don't like it. It's senseless. I know this is an unpopular opinion. But i don't care. Seen far too many guys get knocked out, laying there unconscious, concussed, and unable to return to action for an extended period of time. All because....well....cuz its cool? Cuz its manly? Idk....i just don't understand it. Seems like the sort of thing a bunch of meatheads would get off on.

 

[deytookerjaabs]

The no-call charge on Lanks is made worse by the fact that it's not a little missed play, the NHL claims to be committed to protecting goalies and there wasn't a sniff from the league while on the replay that hit was massive...knocked him a few feet back. The hit that sent Crow out the game was similar.

IMO....the game should be about skill and talent. The physical element gets taken too far, people get hurt, and then there needs to be retaliation, and then someone else gets hurt....its just stupid. Why do people like that sort of stuff? The game is physical enough as is, fast paced and intense. All that added stuff(like lining up a guy with his head down) i personally have never been a fan of. I know, i know...."keep your head up"....and "its always been that way, used to be much worse".....well, I just don't like it. It's senseless. I know this is an unpopular opinion. But i don't care. Seen far too many guys get knocked out, laying there unconscious, concussed, and unable to return to action for an extended period of time. All because....well....cuz its cool? Cuz its manly? Idk....i just don't understand it. Seems like the sort of thing a bunch of meatheads would get off on.

It's human nature to get an edge, to push the envelope a bit, action versus reaction. It's absolutely a primitive thing.

 

[Pez68]

IMO....the game should be about skill and talent. The physical element gets taken too far, people get hurt, and then there needs to be retaliation, and then someone else gets hurt....its just stupid. Why do people like that sort of stuff? The game is physical enough as is, fast paced and intense. All that added stuff(like lining up a guy with his head down) i personally have never been a fan of. I know, i know...."keep your head up"....and "its always been that way, used to be much worse".....well, I just don't like it. It's senseless. I know this is an unpopular opinion. But i don't care. Seen far too many guys get knocked out, laying there unconscious, concussed, and unable to return to action for an extended period of time. All because....well....cuz its cool? Cuz its manly? Idk....i just don't understand it. Seems like the sort of thing a bunch of meatheads would get off on.

Did you ever play? Because I'm not sure how to explain this, unless you've played the game.

 

[BobbyJet]

Did you ever play? Because I'm not sure how to explain this, unless you've played the game.

Don't even try.