Q sending message to Stalberg/Saad | Page 18 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

Q sending message to Stalberg/Saad

HossTheBoss said:
Clearly, it sends a message to Stalberg and the rest of the team: You're not entitled to anything. Anything you did in the past doesn't matter. Players that buy into their roles and want to do whatever it takes to make this team successful will play over guys crying because they're not getting PP time, especially those players in depth roles.

I mean seriously, complaining about a lack of PP time, in the playoffs, heading into round 2, when you contributed 2 assists to it all season? Really? Like I said earlier, be happy your on a winning team, with a chance to win a Cup and on a line that's been successful. Clearly, that's not enough for Stalberg.

Again, Bobby. Viktor Stalberg does not make or break the Blackhawks. Q's not scratching Kane, or Sharp, or Toews or Hossa. He's scratching Viktor Stalberg. Give me a freaking break.
Click to expand...

As long as we win and Q returns to his senses and dresses him next game, but knowing Q he'll then have the excuse that he doesn't want to disrupt a winning formula. I'm not sure how VS is viewed by his teammates but I imagine this certainly doesn't help in their concentration ... and so much for team chemistry that was well established during the season. But who cares, right Q? Your position of authority is more important, right!!!
 
BobbyJet said:
As long as we win and Q returns to his senses and dresses him next game, but knowing Q he'll then have the excuse that he doesn't want to disrupt a winning formula. I'm not sure how VS is viewed by his teammates but I imagine this certainly doesn't help in their concentration ... and so much for team chemistry that was well established during the season. But who cares, right Q? Your position of authority is more important, right!!!
Click to expand...

Why are you making this about Q? Stalberg had 1 assist in the 1st round, and was very meh, and after the series went to Q (in some manner) and questioned why he wasn't on the PP. How do you expect a coach with the depth at his disposal that Chicago has, to react?

Stalberg has 1 career playoff goal, went scoreless in the 1st round, and he's complaining or out-right saying he should be on the PP.

Q has shown a resistance to altering his lineup at all this year. Do you really think he'd scratch Stalberg just to scratch him? If he's not in the lineup, he doesn't deserve to be. It's that simple.

For as old-school a poster as you come across as, I can't believe you're siding with the player in this situation. You could make a legitimate argument that Stalberg was the Hawks 10th or 11th most effective forward against the Wild. Q's not scratching an all-star here.
 
Bobby, you'd be the first to complain if we found out down the road that Stalberg complained, continued to blow in the games, and Q didn't sit him.

If they were sitting on the bench and Stalberg said, "why cant I go on the PP?" Do you not think he would be benched for the rest of the game by any coach?
 
Chelios said:
So a second round pick that never scored much at any level becoming a solid 3rd liner on the best team in the NHL is a disappointment?



Frolik was a soft offensive player who had lost his scoring touch, and has been transformed into a solid grinder who gives everything he has every shift and is one of the best PKer in the league. While that may not be development, it certainly was a good job by the coaching staff to completely transform his game. Not that you would acknowledge that.



How many 22 year old europeans in their 2nd season of North American hockey are trusted to play the kind of role Kruger is?



Saad improved as the season wore on. He has taken a step back in the playoffs but that is to be expected for a rookie in his first real taste of playoff action.

Funny that you refuse to acknowledge Shaw, who has exceded everyone's expectations (remember how many of us were questioning Q for having him centre the 3rd line), or our two young super stars who seem to be developing pretty well under this coaching staff.
Click to expand...

Don't want to make it about Kruger but I have about 11 guys that fit your query. I did miss Shaw in your post, will get to that, puck drop is upon us.
 
Hawkaholic said:
Bobby, you'd be the first to complain if we found out down the road that Stalberg complained, continued to blow in the games, and Q didn't sit him.

If they were sitting on the bench and Stalberg said, "why cant I go on the PP?" Do you not think he would be benched for the rest of the game by any coach?
Click to expand...

That's not even the right way to go about it.

If Stalberg wants to be on the PP, he goes to Q and says, "Look Q, I want to make a difference. I want to help this team. I think I can help the PP" and then go out and prove it with your play.

You don't ask, "why". You don't say, "why can't I?". He's not a toddler. He's supposed to be a professional, playing in the best league in the world. If you want to be on the PP, go out and show Q why you should be on the PP. He was on the PP all season, and what did he do with it? He got 2 assists and was an inconsistent net-presence. That's not how you hold a PP spot.
 
The way Q has handled VS all along, it's a credit VS didn't tell him to shove it a while ago. Just like Pirri will if another guy gets a spot gifted to him again.
 
HossTheBoss said:
Why are you making this about Q? Stalberg had 1 assist in the 1st round, and was very meh, and after the series went to Q (in some manner) and questioned why he wasn't on the PP. How do you expect a coach with the depth at his disposal that Chicago has, to react?

Stalberg has 1 career playoff goal, went scoreless in the 1st round, and he's complaining or out-right saying he should be on the PP.

Q has shown a resistance to altering his lineup at all this year. Do you really think he'd scratch Stalberg just to scratch him? If he's not in the lineup, he doesn't deserve to be. It's that simple.

For as old-school a poster as you come across as, I can't believe you're siding with the player in this situation. You could make a legitimate argument that Stalberg was the Hawks 10th or 11th most effective forward against the Wild. Q's not scratching an all-star here.
Click to expand...

Sure it is.
 
HossTheBoss said:
That's not even the right way to go about it.

If Stalberg wants to be on the PP, he goes to Q and says, "Look Q, I want to make a difference. I want to help this team. I think I can help the PP" and then go out and prove it with your play.

You don't ask, "why". You don't say, "why can't I?". He's not a toddler. He's supposed to be a professional, playing in the best league in the world. If you want to be on the PP, go out and show Q why you should be on the PP. He was on the PP all season, and what did he do with it? He got 2 assists and was an inconsistent net-presence. That's not how you hold a PP spot.
Click to expand...

I agree, its been a bit over blown I think. But Q isnt last years Q..doesnt sound like he is putting up with some of the crap anymore. At first, he was probably trying to light a fire, until he heard Viks press tid bit.
 
BobbyJet said:
Sure it is.
Click to expand...

What reason does Q have to "pick on" poor lil Stalberg? What does he gain? Nothing. Therefore, especially given how Q's handled team's in the playoffs before and this season, I think it's safe to assume Q's not scratching Stalberg for the sake of scratching him. It's that simple Bobby. You can figure it out.
 
This just looks weird, why throw a team off their rhythm taking a player out that has been there all season. It looks like only two lines are playing now, like it or not Stalberg was part of that third line. Handzus needs to come out of the second line and Bolland needs to go there, Carcillo needs to come out of the game and handzus or Smith take his spot and we need Stally back. If this series is lost its all on Q
 
HossTheBoss said:
What reason does Q have to "pick on" poor lil Stalberg? What does he gain? Nothing. Therefore, especially given how Q's handled team's in the playoffs before and this season, I think it's safe to assume Q's not scratching Stalberg for the sake of scratching him. It's that simple Bobby. You can figure it out.
Click to expand...

Has anyone told you lately? Consider it done.
 
Q has to set an example that he's in charge not VS. Good for Q. Winey little VS.
Move Froelich up to the PP if it doesn't produce.
 
I think the damning thing for Stalberg, to get back into the line-up, was that the third line was just as effective - if not more so - with Bolland back there (real shocker, I know). Stalberg picked the worst time of the year to put himself ahead of the team.
 
Although Handzus can't keep up, pretty clear this is the 3rd line.

Still don't see why Stalberg shouldn't play over Carcillo, but meh.
 
theaub said:
Although Handzus can't keep up, pretty clear this is the 3rd line.

Still don't see why Stalberg shouldn't play over Carcillo, but meh.
Click to expand...

Based on talent he should be.. but even then, Carcillo had a really solid game tonight. He was physical, he was skating well and his forechecking lead to the Hawks 3rd goal when the puck was on the netting of the net.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom