Man I hate the Hawks, I want them to fail. I'm pissed that the Canucks made them look good. Vancouver isn't making life easy for themselves, We have many bloated contracts on the team, and our play is starting to show that. Malholtra is doing squat, and the same with Kesler. What the hell is the matter with Bieska? Gets a new contract, time to play like crap it seems.

Hopefully Luongo is ready to go for our next game. Snides isn't as good as everyone thinks he is.

As much as I hate to say it, I starting to doubt that Vancouver will reach the promise land. Maybe in 17 more years.

You are right in the game came down to who played better in the net. Vancouver dominated in the first period of that game, but could not score on Crawford. They made some great passes that would have been easy goals if they connected to the stick, but most did not. Once the blackhawks powerplay got hot, (which it has been for the previous 3 before the game we are writing about) they made some nifty goals quickly and gained the momentum for the second half. Snides then let in some not so great goal, but to the hawks credit they scored with speed and power. Skating fast and pounding them in and shooting fast and pounding in rebounds. With this in mind, I would say the Blackhawks are just playing at their top level right now and Vancouver is not. Loungo might help when he gets back so the team will probably improve.

Your username is very accurate, reading this analysis was funtime indeed.

Let me just point out that I disagree that Toewes is the most complete player in the NHL, how you can not give that title to Crosby is beyond me. From there it gets worse, Malkin is a better centre than Kane and Staal vs. Bolland is a no contest. In fact, there is a strong case to be made for at least 4 teams in the West being stronger down the middle than the Hawks.

Keith and Seabrook are indeed world class, but claiming that a player like Steve Montador would be a top two pair D-man on 15 teams in the league is laughable.

I am starting to see an alarming trend from the Hawks. In four games (last nights included) they just showed no effort at all. I understand that the rest of the games they have looked very good, but taking nights off is never a good thing. Let's show a better effort against Edmonton tonight Hawks or a struggling team just might whip you.

Your name is equally accurate because you must be high when you post. you seem to think that offensive output is what makes a player well-rounded.

How can I claim that Toewes "MIGHT" be the most complete player in the NHL? Well let's see. He only excels in every facet of the game. Does he score as many points per game as Crosby? Nope, but he's a lot better defensively, and a lot better in the faceoff circle. Results don't lie either. Toewes won gold as a junior where he took every single shot in the shootout for team Canada and scored 3 times to win the game. He won the MVP of the Olympic tournament where Canada won gold and he had the best +/- on the team, and he won the Conn Smythe trophy when the hawks won the cup. Ya, I'd say he is in the conversation for most complete player in the NHL. Scores, takes important faceoffs, kills penealties, plays hard at both ends of the ice, more durable than Crosby, nuff said.

Is kane a better center than Malkin? You seem to think no, but Kanes's 21 points and +11 rating compared to Malkin's -1 rating over his 12 games played this year suggest that at this exact point in time my claim is correct.

Bolland vs Staal? Of course Staal has the edge offensively. What I said was that Bolland was a top notch shut-down center. Better at that particular role than Staal.

How high were you when you posted? Did you get into the bottle of Flinstone Vitamins again?

As for Montador, you're correct, he's no world beater, but he is a solid D man. He'd be top 2 on a lot of low-end NHL clubs.

Let's also take into account here that Crosby and malkin are both health risks and Kane and Toewes don't miss games. If you were starting a franchise tomorrow and had a choice of taking either Toewes or Crosby you would not be wrong for taking Toewes.

Oh, and LOLOLOLOLOLOL @ you for thinking at least 4 other teams are better down the middle than Chicago. LULZ. Seriously, you must be so fucking stoned. The only team that would even be debatable is the Penguins, but as I've just proven, that is merely "debatable".

Thanks for coming out. Snort less crushed Pez before you post in my general direction again.

Boy am I a prognosticator of doom or what?

See, no one replies.  I have to do it myself.

Ha did you hear the score for the Edmonton game 9 to 2. I was glad I decided not to watch it and only watched the highlights. It was like , "Score Edmonton," over and over it was crazy. Hope they break the bad string of play soon because they gave points to the Avs Northwestwern rivals for shame. I watch Chicago in the hopes they stomp Detroit I hope they do not dissapoint.

Of course I watched it.  That's what I was refering to.  :p

I'll give you one credit for the fact that Crosby and Malkin are more injury prone than Kane and Toewes. Other than that I don't see a lot of common ground here.

If you were to start a new franchise today and picked Toewes as your franchise player you would indeed be an idiot. In fact, if you picked both Toewes and Kane over Sidney Crosby you'd still be making a huge mistake. Crosby is not only easily the best player in the game right now, he might be one of the best players in the history of the game. Yes, we're almost talking Lemieux like talent level here. I can't stand Pittsburgh and don't care much for Sid the Kid myself, but to deny that he is by far the best player in the game is ludicrous. I'll say that I think you underestimate Crosby's defensive skills and insane commitment to win and improve, and just leave it at that.

You then go on to compare Malkin to Kane, and pretent that a +/- rating can show that Kane is clearly the better player. A more reasonable comparison would be to compare Malkin to Toewes. I'll agree that Toewes is better rounded than Malkin, but Malkin is a better offensive center than Toewes. I'll flip your statement around and say that if you were starting a franchise today and could choose between Toewes and Malkin, you would not be wrong to pick Malkin.

Finally, sure, Bolland is a solid defensive forward, but so is Paul Gaustad and about a million other guys out there. Bolland is no Ryan Kessler to put it mildly, not to mention the gold standard of two way forwards; Pavel Datsyuk.

In conclusion, The Chicago Blackhawks have a great young first line center, solid second line talent in Kane and Sharp whoever ends up centering that line and a good defensive forward in Bollard. This is definietly a strong core, especially considering the age of these players, but in my opinion it's very debatable if it is the strongest outfit in the NHL.

For the record, I said that there are 4 teams in the Western Conference you can make a case for being stronger down the middle than the Hawks, that doesn't even include the Penguins. I can understand why Hawks fans are excited about their team though, I would be drooling if my team had that kind of young talent down the middle.

As for Montador, I'd say he would (should) be a 6th or 7th defenseman on virtually every team in the NHL.

Oh sorry, you really sat through it after 2 periods when it was already over? That was clearly a breakdown in both goaltenders confidence, that game  would only be fun to watch if your an oil fan.