After a day of listening to irate callers on the Team 1040 today and receiving some nice feedback on my blog from yesterday’s article ‘Why Everyone Hates Luongo’, I think it would be interesting to take a closer look at Roberto Luongo, by the numbers. Everyone has their opinion on Luongo, and there are a whole lot of misconceptions. Some fans believe that Luongo stunk last year (despite an appearance in game 7 of the final, a bunch of playoff shutouts, a Vezina nomination and a Jennings trophy), which is clearly not accurate. But was he great last year? Average? Is he terrible this year? Is he playing like he always plays in October? Lets answer those questions.

The most important stat for goaltenders is save percentage. Goals against average gets a lot of play, as do wins, but they are far more dependent on the team in front of you than the save percentage stat. That’s not to say that save percentage is a flawless stat. It can be skewed if you’re on a defensive team that only allows shots from far away or if you’re on a team that allows a lot of breakaways and odd man rushes.

In my opinion, an excellent season for Roberto Luongo is if he ranks in the top three in save percentage among starting goalies. A good season is if he ranks in the top 10, an average to below average season is if he ranks 10-20 and a bad season is if he ranks 20-30.

Save Percentage – Regular Season with Vancouver

2006-07: .921 (rank among starting goalies: 3rd)

2007-08: .917 (rank among starting goalies: 13th)

2008-09: .920 (rank among starting goalies: 5th)

2009-10: .913 (rank among starting goalies: 15th)

2010-11: .928 (rank among starting goalies: 3rd)

Quite simply, Roberto Luongo has been a reliable number one goalie. His numbers have been consistently good and he has been one of the best goalies in the league year after year.

So should fans be worried about his poor start to this season or should they be comforted in the fact that he always has a slow start? Lets look at the numbers.

Save Percentage – First Four Starts or the Regular Season with Vancouver

2006-07: .941

2007-08: .883

2008-09: .895

2009-10: .865

2010-11: .920

2011-12: .856

So the notion that Luongo always has a slow start is somewhat true (although not so slow in 2010 and 2006), but he has never had a worse save percentage through the first four games. I don’t think that fans should be alarmed by his start, but it’s not completely par for the course.

Luongo’s regular season numbers always end up being very good, but his playoff numbers have not been quite so sparkling. When looking at starting goalie rankings, remember that only sixteen starting goalies make the playoffs.

Save Percentage – Playoffs with Vancouver

2006-07: .941 (rank among starting goalies: 2nd)

2007-08: did not make playoffs

2008-09: .914 (rank among starting goalies: 9th)

2009-10: .895 (rank among starting goalies: 12th)

2010-11: .914 (rank among starting goalies: 8th)

Analyzing those stats, one can come to the conclusion that Luongo has been average when it comes to the postseason (other than the 2006-07 playoffs when he was spectacular).

But what about last year’s playoffs in particular? Was he good? Bad? Somewhere in between?

Save Percentage – 2011 Playoffs

vs Chicago: .903

vs Nashville: .933

vs San Jose: .931

vs Boston: .891

These numbers aren’t surprising to look at. Luongo was great against Nashville and San Jose (particularly San Jose, because they have a lot of fire power) but was average to below average against Chicago and Boston. Of course that doesn’t tell the whole story against Boston though.

Save Percentage – 2011 Playoffs vs Boston

Game 1: 1.000

Game 2: .933

Game 3: .789

Game 4: .800

Game 5: 1.000

Game 6: .625

Game 7: .850

Luongo was terrible in three games, spectacular in three games and below average in game 7.

So what conclusion can we come to with all of these numbers? We can come to the conclusion that Luongo can be relied upon in the regular season but he has been inconsistent in the playoffs. He has had great playoff moments and forgettable ones. And for that, he deserves some criticism. I have no trouble with fans criticizing Luongo, but before you do so, get your facts straight.

The biggest game the Canucks franchise has played since game 7 of the 1994 Stanley Cup finals did not disappoint on Tuesday night. It wasn’t easy, but the Canucks finally got their revenge over their arch rivals, the Chicago Blackhawks. It took good goaltending from Roberto Luongo, a smart defensive corps and a gritty effort by their forwards to edge the Blackhawks, 2-1 in overtime.

While the victory was a great team victory for the Canucks, in many ways game 7 was the Alex Burrows show. Burrows, who up until game 6 had many wondering if he simply didn’t have an extra gear for the speed of the Stanley Cup playoffs (due to his lack of production in the playoffs in his career), was all over the ice. He scored the first goal after a great power move by Ryan Kesler. He took a penalty shot in the 3rd period (which I think if he used his patented forehand-backhand deke, he would have scored). He was the one who gave the puck away at centre ice which lead to Jonathan Toews’ improbable game tying shorthanded goal. He was the one who took the ill-timed penalty in overtime. And of course he was the one that scored the clutch goal in overtime to send the Canucks to the 2nd round of the playoffs.

Adjustments

Head coach Alain Vigneault kept his new look lines from game 6 in tact for game 7 and it paid off. The Kesler-Burows-Raymond unit was their best line. While the Sedins struggled with Mikael Samuelsson, the 3rd line (Lapierre-Higgins-Hansen) was a pleasant surprise. The fourth line was a rough and tumble line, and looked capable despite limited minutes. Of course, he also started the right goaltender in game 7: Roberto Luongo.

I noticed a different style of play from the Canucks in game 7. There was a clear direction from the coaching staff to not get too spread out through the neutral zone. Even early in the game, the Canucks were loathed to chase the Blackhawks when one of their defencemen brought the puck up the ice.

Home Ice Advantage

I was a little worried that the pressure of the home crowd might work against the Canucks in game 7 but clearly it didn’t. I was impressed with the constant noise from the home crowd. More importantly, I was impressed that the crowd didn’t sound nervous at all.

The Overtime Power Play

Thank goodness Roberto Luongo was able to stop Patrick Sharp while shorthanded in overtime because otherwise the Canucks would be left to answer a lot of uncomfortable questions. The Canucks played a great game in game 7, but their lack of finish almost allowed the Blackhawks to pull off the upset. Had Sharp scored, Alain Vigneault likely would have been fired and Roberto Luongo’s reputation as a big game choke artist would be solidified. The Sedins (no points in game 7) and Ryan Kesler (no goals in the playoffs) would also be called into question. Every aspect of this franchise would have been unglued, had one more shot gone wrong. But Luongo made the save, the team killed the penalty and Burrows made Chris Campoli pay for a poor clearing attempt and the rest is history.

Where was Gillis?

Were you wondering where Mike Gillis was during the overtime winning goal? Well, he was in the washroom!

History Books

Luckily the Canucks avoided being added to the list of teams to blow a 3-0 series lead, because that would have lived on forever. Instead, for the first time in team history, the Canucks won a game 7 in overtime at home. Of course, the only time they’ve won a game 7 overtime came in Calgary on a breakaway goal by Pavel Bure (kind of ironic that one of the lyrics to Kyprios’ song is “Burrows, looking like Bure”). As far as where this goal will sit compared to the other great goals in team history, well that will all depend on how far this team goes. Congratulations boys, the job is 25% done. And the job only gets tougher.

I’ve been to two game sevens now. My record stands at .500, but both times, a flair for the dramatic has kept Canucks fans’ hearts pumping non-stop, clammy hands clenched, and knees and feet shaking uncontrollably. My first game seven was in 2004, when the Canucks played the Flames (the game where Matt Cooke scored shorthanded with five seconds left, only to have the Flames respond on the same PP in OT), but that will have to wait for another time. My second, was tonight.

What fans who are not at the arena live miss, is the build up, the atmosphere, the noise, the celebrations, and most of all, the jubilation when the home team wins a game seven. There aren’t very many life experiences that can compare to it, but here I go…my attempt to take you to Rogers Arena and how tonight’s crowd can be thanked for helping the Canucks beat those hated Blackhawks.

What I loved most about tonight’s game was that even though the Canucks has lost the last three games and though a collective nervousness clouded over the city, the fans at the game did an amazing job getting the Canucks ready and raring to go, no matter how nervous everybody was. Chants of “Go Canucks Go” and “Blackhawks Suck” echoed in the concourse as soon as the doors opened at 6PM, continued as the Canucks hit the ice for warmup, and carried right up until faceoff. I have been at GM Place/Canada Hockey Place/Rogers Arena many times before and don’t remember it being THAT loud…ever. I’m sure that the noise and excitement of the fans calmed the nerves of the boys in blue tonight, and you could tell. Right off the bat, the Blackhawks were rushed, flattened into the boards, and just 2 minutes in, a power move by Kesler ended in the first Burrows goal. If the building wasn’t loud enough at puck drop, it sure was after that goal.

Throughout the rest of the game, and more specifically in the third period, fans tried to keep everybody going, but you could sense the uneasiness and nervousness. Fans in section 301/302 tried many times to get the wave going, but wasn’t to be. Instead, we made up for it by cheering EVERY defensive play, whether it be a blocked shot, a puck-battle win, a defensive zone faceoff win, or even a clear. For 17:56 of that third period, things were great, and going on as good as it could be.

When Jonathan Toews popped the tying goal in with 2:04 left, you could just feel the excruciating pain, frustration, and overall “I CAN’T BELIEVE THIS IS HAPPENING” at Rogers Arena. Most games, that feeling would have carried over until the end of regulation, but tonight was different. As shocked as we were, we felt a responsibility to get the team going again, and boy, it was amazing. Fans stood and cheered the remaining minute of the power play and even as time expired, we knew it was just a matter of time before we would be cheering once again.

Fans willed the team through the OT penalty kill and I’m sure Burrows fed off the energy of not only his teammates saving his ass for taking such a foolish penalty, but the crowd getting jacked up another notch after a fantastic kill. The rest is all history. The building exploded when Burrows wired the game winner and the jubilation and glee flowed into the stairwells, concourse, plaza, and surrounding streets. I must have high fived over 100 strangers as I tried to leave the building (after a good 10 minutes of soaking everything in), and joined in with a bunch of drunks trying to sing my new favourite song: Chelsea Dagger. Fireworks, undoubtedly stored since Halloween for a moment like this, lit up the night sky, as fans cheered louder with BOOM and BANG.

I, having grown up a Canucks fan dating back to 1989, was always a believer that the Vancouver Canucks had one of, if not the worst, fans in the entire league. Blame gets chucked in all directions following losses, coaches’ moves are questioned negatively, and most are happier when the Leafs lose than when the Canucks win. “Fans” hop off and on the bandwagon at will, and pretenders only watch games because it’s the hip thing to do (if you are buying a Burrows t-shirt or jersey ONLY because of tonight, shame on you – you know who you are), but one thing that I appreciated after game seven this year: the fans at Rogers Arena helped propel the Canucks into the second round by sacrificing their voice boxes (and a few years of their lives from irregular heartbeats and high blood pressure, I’m sure). Props to the 18,000+ believers in attendance. You did everyone proud.

For the first time in the Canucks-Blackhawks Trilogy, we will have a game 7. And it will happen in the most improbable way. As you must know by now, the Canucks have squandered a 3-0 series lead and now face elimination on Tuesday night.

A few of my observations from last night’s game:

-I wasn’t a fan of the Cory Schneider start in net, but he played well… Apart from his two major puck handling blunders. In many ways, those two errors cost the Canucks the game.

-Despite losing 4-3 in game 6, the Canucks were the best team on the ice last night, but the best team doesn’t always win.

-Kevin Bieksa had the best game of his career last night. He logged over 36 minutes of ice time, had a clutch goal and was a plus 2. Every decision he made seemed to be the right one, and he wasn’t playing a conservative game by any means.

-Bieksa had to play big minutes in part because the Canucks lost Sami Salo to injury. It’s the playoffs so nobody is saying what is wrong, but I wouldn’t count on him playing in game 7. In true Sami Salo fashion, he injured himself simply skating up the ice.

-Maybe with Salo injured we will see Keith Ballard inserted back into the lineup. It makes absolutely no sense to me why he has been benched time after time. He’s clearly better than Andrew Alberts and Aaron Rome. Why this isn’t clear for Alain Vigneault is a mystery. To make matters worse, Alberts was a central figure on the winning goal, as his mobility was an issue dealing with Marian Hossa.

-Alex Burrows arrived last night. It was his best game of the series by far, as he picked up a goal and two assists.

-I thought the referees absolutely shafted the Canucks last night and Mike Gillis agrees. Somehow, with the Canucks carrying most of the play, they were given only two power plays. I’m all for letting the players play, but on two occasions there were ‘automatic’ penalties that were overlooked. The first came when Daniel Sedin was high sticked on an offside call, the second came when Henrik Sedin’s stick was slashed in half.

-Roberto Luongo is getting some heat for his play in game 6 and I think it’s unwarranted. Sure, he looked a little shaky coming in cold in the third period, but the bottom line is he only let in one goal and you can’t blame him for it. He needed to make an acrobatic save on a deflected shot. To expect great rebound control or to make the second save is asking a lot.

Lineup Changes

-Bryan Bickell is injured and will miss game 7. Tomas Kopecky appears ready to return from injury, he’s traveling with the team to Vancouver.

-Sami Salo will likely miss game 7 as well, perhaps he will be replaced by Keith Ballard.

-It will be interesting to see if Alain Vigneault decides to play Cody Hodgson in game 7. Personally I think he should play Maxim Lapierre on the 3rd line and re-insert Tanner Glass at 4th line centre. We probably won’t find out until game time.

-Of course the biggest lineup change is the starting goalie, Roberto Luongo.

Keys to Game 7

A quick start. It goes without saying that the first goal is important, but perhaps more important will be the second goal. If Chicago gets the first two goals, the pressure will mount.

Special teams. It remains to be seen how many penalties will be called in game 7, but the Canucks will need to be better on the penalty kill and power play. I would love for Alain Vigneault to put Alex Edler back onto the first unit power play in place of Mikael Samuelsson. I know he reads this blog, so that should be no problem…

Pressure. There will be lots to go around, especially for the home team, especially for Roberto Luongo. How he and the players in front of him deal with that pressure will absolutely be the biggest key to the game. They need to harness the energy from the home crowd and play smart with controlled aggression.

History

This will be the 10th game 7 in Canucks history, the first without Trevor Linden. They’re 5-4 in game 7s, 3-2 in game 7s at home. The Blackhawks will try to become just the fourth team in NHL history to win a series after trailing 3-0.

This game is one of the most important games in franchise history and undoubtedly the most important game in franchise history that didn’t take place in 1994. It may well define the legacy of Alain Vigneault, Roberto Luongo and the Sedins. If they are unable to win this series, serious questions will be asked and Vancouver will have a very grim summer. On the other hand, if they win this series this propel this team to greatness.

Dear Hockey Gods,

Please forgive me. Check that, please forgive us. By us, I of course mean Canuck Nation. As a whole, we mocked the Chicago Blackhawks when we were up 3 games to 0. They were too tired, too beat up.. we thought. We began to ask Theo Fleury to eat his words, after he predicted a first round exit. And of course, I wrote a blog urging fans to get their brooms ready. As sure as it seemed, we have clearly upset you (the hockey gods). It’s the only way to explain two blowout losses in games 4 and 5 and a crushing overtime defeat in game 6.

On behalf of Canucks fans everywhere, we have learned our lesson. Sorry. Please forgive us.

Sincerely,

Rob

Frankly, I’m amazed at the amount of debate over which goalie should start in game 7 for the Canucks-Blackhawks series. Currently on the Team 1040 website, their poll shows 53% in favour of Luongo, 47% in favour of Schneider.

Personally, I would have given Luongo the start in game 6 as well. I didn’t hate the decision, but I didn’t like it either. Lets face it though, Schneider was given the opportunity to win game 6, and FAILED. The team played well in front of him, and he let in 3 goals through just over 2 periods. Had Luongo performed as Schneider did, the widespread feeling would be that Luongo failed. So why should Schneider be held to a lesser standard? People are overlooking this because he’s the young guy, but he let in 3 goals on 20 shots… and 2 of them were BAD GOALS! The two puck handling mishaps were the two worst goals let in by any Canucks goaltender in the series.

Now I’m not trying to blast Cory Schneider here (he played well apart from the two gaffs), but I think the criticism about Luongo’s play has been grossly overplayed. Luongo’s numbers aren’t great, mostly due to the team in front of him having two straight no shows in game 4 and game 5. The goal most criticized in game 5 was the Marian Hossa goal. Nevermind the fact that it was a shot from a world class player in the slot with Alex Edler sticking his stick in the way. The only goal Luongo let in in game 6 was a rebound after he made an amazing save on a deflected shot going top corner with traffic in front.

Luongo should start game 7 because he deserves it. He’s won a game 7 in 2007 (that year the team blew a 3-1 series lead) and a gold medal in the Olympics. If the team plays like they did in game 6 in front of him in game 7, they should win.

In advance of game 6 in Chicago, the Canucks must find some way to re-find their form, just as the Chicago Blackhawks did before game 4. Chicago was inspired by their fallen teammate, Brent Seabrook, and used it as a rallying point. Well then, Alain Vigneault, I have something for you. Check that, I have something for the bulletin board.

Steve Rosenbloom from the Chicago Tribune offered up this article on Friday:

The Blackhawks will not practice today. The Vancouver Canucks, I believe, were being tended to by all the king’s horses and all the king’s men.

Or should we be calling them the Vanquitter Canucks after the way they’ve rolled over easily the last two games?

Or maybe the Panicouver Canucks, what with the fire drill going on in places where the players’ brains and hearts used to be.

Then again, the way this comeback is unfolding, the way one team is halfway to accomplishing an epic choke, maybe we should call them the Vancouver Cubs. I mean, if you didn’t know better, you’d think Roberto Luongo is Alex Gonzalez (not Steve Bartman because Bartman at least got a glove on the ball).
Admit it, Hawks fans: You’re giddy. You’re imagining the improbable four straight wins after those first three losses.

Can’t blame you. I’m the same way after the Hawks utterly destroyed their stupid and heartless opponent for the second consecutive game and forced Luongo to make the skate of shame for the second consecutive game.

The Canucks had a burst early and drew a power play, but got nothing. And then the Hawks got everything.

They raked the Canucks in every area — power-play, penalty-killing, even-strength, loose pucks, board battlesm you name it — prompting memories of last spring’s dominance. Duncan Keith had two goals and four-point night. Marian Hossa scored twice. Yes, THAT Marian Hossa, the one who was MIA the last two weeks and had scored only three goals in 26 Hawks playoff games before Thursday night. Hossa’s power play goal at 5:54 of the first period beat Luongo to the glove side. Same goes for his second goal. About half the Hawks’ goals have gone that way in their two wins. It’s so obvious that even the people in Panicouver should be able to see it.

The Hawks were faster, tougher and better, just like the Canucks were in winning the first three games. Doesn’t that seem a long time ago?

The Hawks looked like the puck-possession version of the Globetrotters again. They have played that way since Brent Seabrook got that cheap shot from Raffi Torres or since they went down three games, take your pick. Perhaps they finally got mad and motivated, or perhaps they relaxed to their default setting of a skating-passing game when they had nothing to lose.

The Canucks, meanwhile, are paralyzed. The’ve played tight and bad. They are unwilling to do whatever it takes to get the most difficult win. The Canucks didn’t want to skate unless they could throw a cheap shot in Game 5. Stupid and dirty must be two of their four major food groups. Vancouver turtled again, even earlier than in Game 4.

I guess the Hockey Gods don’t like quitters. Heart, brains — do the Canucks have anything when it matters, or just in the regular season?

It could all go bad for the Hawks at home in Game 6 on Sunday. It has gone bad at home during this season, especially in the third period. That would be a killer. Jeez, after the last two games, losing this series would be a killer. It’s like the Canucks made the Hawks to get out of the chair and bring the leather belt with them.

But I know it could go bad because that’s what happens in the Stanley Cup playoffs. It happened to the Canucks justlikethat when they were playing as brilliantly as the Hawks have the last two games, scoring 11 of the last 12 goals in this series.

So, this isn’t a free pass to the second round. There are still two games to go. But I’m giddy over the way the Hawks are turning Vancouver into the Can’yuk-yuk-yuks.

So there you go AV. Post that up on the bulletin board and watch the boys come out with a fire lit under their ass. If that doesn’t inspire you to shut up your critics, nothing will.

And if you need EVEN more inspiration, this should provide it:

Well, did anyone see that coming? After spanking the Canucks 7-2 in game 4, they followed that up with another beat down in game 5. So here we are, nervous, panicking. Is it justified? Absolutely yes. Chicago has all of the momentum and Vancouver will need to turn it around.

Thoughts on game 5:

-Chicago played well, but Vancouver also made them look good. The Hawks got a boatload of great scoring chances due to a nervous looking tentative group of forwards and defencemen.

-The Canucks defense were getting backed in too much, as evidenced by Marian Hossa’s goal where Alex Edler backed all the way back to his own hash marks. Not only that, but he deflected the shot.

-That brings me to my next point. Don’t place this loss on Roberto Luongo. All four goals that beat him were grade A scoring chances. They were shots by world class players with deflections and screens. Perhaps the only blame you can put on him was that he needed to make at least one or two out of this world saves to keep his team in it.

-The only positive the Canucks could take from game 5 was the play of their third line. The Raymond-Hodgson-Hansen line looked impressive. In fact, Cody Hodgson might have been one of the Canucks’ best players.

Looking Ahead to game 6:

-Inevitably the question will be asked if Cory Schneider should start game 6. Totally ridiculous. If Luongo had been bad, then I could see a point. Alex Edler played poorly tonight, should Aaron Rome replace him?

-Oh wait, Aaron Rome couldn’t replace Edler, because Aaron Rome played in game 5 ahead of Keith Ballard. Why? Keith Ballard had been an even plus-minus in every one of the Canucks first four games. For the record, Aaron Rome was a minus two in game 5.

-So what does Alain Vigneault do in game 6? I don’t know, but I know what I would do:

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows

Raymond-Kesler-Hansen

Torres-Hodgson-Samuelsson

Higgins-Lapierre-Glass

-These lines do a few things. I really liked the way the third line looked in game 5, so Raymond and Hansen will try to spark Ryan Kesler. Mikael Samuelsson gets moved to the third line, simply because it’s not working for him on the second line right now. Cody Hodgson stays in the lineup because of his strong play in game 5.

-So what can you hope for in game 6 Canucks fans? Well, the Canucks need to with emotion, but also need to be smart. They also need to not panic if they get down a goal or two or three. Their mantra all year has been to “play the right way” and they need to keep that up.

So be calm Canucks fans, stay behind your team. It’s disturbing to see them unravel like this in game 4 and 5, but they have two more chances to close out the series. They also catch a break that there is two days off before the next game. That will give them a chance to collect their thoughts and a chance for the coaching staff to make some adjustments.

Hey, did you read my blog posting yesterday titled: “Canucks-Blackhawks Game 4 Preview – Get Your Brooms Ready“? Whoops! Well it appears some of the Canucks did, because they looked like an overconfident team in game 4. The Blackhawks have life.

The Blackhawks showed the heart of a champion in game 4, refusing to give up and giving by far their best effort of the series. The Canucks weren’t ready for it. Combine that with a brutal game from the referees and the fact that Roberto Luongo was unable to bail out his teammates, and you end up with a 7-2 win for the Blackhawks.

So that’s the bad news. The good news? It’s only one game. It really doesn’t matter if you lose 7-2 or 3-2 when it comes to the Stanley Cup playoffs.

So what went wrong? Two things. The Canucks clearly weren’t ready for the push from the Blackhawks, which is a little concerning. They needed the killer instinct. They didn’t have it. And they paid for it.

What else went wrong? The Blackhawks were  a lot better. Sure, they were missing Brent Seabrook on defense, but they also got Dave Bolland back. They also were able to put Patrick Sharp back at centre, which gave them three lines that they were comfortable with. That’s a big change from the one line team they had in games 1-3.

So Canucks fans, should we freak out? Should we lose our minds? Of course not. It’s one game, and it’s a kick in the butt for the Canucks. The Blackhawks have life, and they have the attention of the Vancouver Canucks. Game 5 promises to be a beauty.

Before we move on to game 4, here are a few quick hits about game 3:

-The Canucks were great at taking the body while staying out of the box in game 1 and 2, but got away from that in game 3. The Blackhawks power play responded with two power play goals. Giving the Blackhawks power play numerous chances is a recipe for disaster going forward.

-Roberto Luongo was outstanding again, as he was in game 1. He has had a few show stopping saves in this series. Great to see.

-Raffi Torres was probably lucky to not get suspended for his blind side head shot on Brent Seabrook. At least I think so.

-The Sedins had their best game of the series in game 3, notching two points each. Impressive given the fact that Joel Quenneville has an easier time matching up his shutdown defense pair against them at home.

As the Canucks and Blackhawks head into game 4, I have come to the conclusion that the Canucks are just too talented, too deep and too healthy for the Chicago Blackhawks. The Hawks look tired. Patrick Sharp, Troy Brouwer and maybe even Jonathan Toews are playing hurt. On top of that, they’re playing without the injured Dave Bolland and Tomas Kopecky. The Canucks are without Manny Malhotra, but other than that, they’re as healthy as you could expect at this time of the year.

So do the Blackhawks have a chance? Sure, they have a chance, but not a good one. They might win a game, maybe two, but the writing is on the wall in my mind, barring some kind of unforeseen circumstance.

That hasn’t stopped Jonathan Toews from talking tough though:

They’re a beatable team and we haven’t been able to do that yet… We see weaknesses on their team and we have one more chance to do it and it’s best if we don’t look beyond that game and the road ahead.

What does Henrik Sedin have to say about this? Well, this:

Does he mean our power play, our penalty kill, our five-on-five?

Oh SNAP! You’ve got to love trash talkin’ Sedins. He did add something politically correct after that, but I enjoy the trash talk.