Has Toews exposed the real Canucks?

He suggested the Canucks weren't deserving of the respect they were being given.

For awhile it looked like he was right.

But now the real Canucks have sent the Stanley Cup champions out the door.

Who got exposed?

Not the Canucks.

Can't trust a guy who can't grow a full beard.

I think the Canucks sat back on their seats thinking they had 4 games to knock the Hawks off. Turns out they can turn it on when its needed.

He and the Hawks thought they knew who we were.
The media thought we were that too.
Even the fans were beginning to think, we were who they thought we were.

Turns out we aren't that team... We are the team we knew we were the entire season.

It took 40 years...


[Identity crisis solved.]

The canucks showed their inexperience and lacked the killer instinct by being complete no-shows for games 4 and 5. Chicago took the bull by the horns and made the Canucks pay.

Whats telling is that when both teams were desperate in games 6 and 7, Vancouver absolutely dominated Chicago. Even though the scores were close and the hawks won in game 6, it was apparent (to me anyways) that Vancouver had the better team and Chicago couldn't skate with them.

I hope the boys can learn from this scare. Anything can happen in game 7, and even when it seems like your team is dominating, you can lose it all very quickly...
If the nucks are up 3-0 or 3-1 in another series, they have to play like they did in game 6 and 7 to make sure they put the opposing team away.

Toews is a great player and a great leader, but he showed a lack of respect for the Canucks during this series.

Can't trust a guy who can't grow a full beard.

Hey, just cause Toews has more facial hair than me ( :( ) doesn't mean I'm not trustworthy...

Seriously though, I go days without shaving and people don't even notice...

Hey, just cause Toews has more facial hair than me ( :( ) doesn't mean I'm not trustworthy...

Seriously though, I go days without shaving and people don't even notice...

It could be worse. I have to shave between periods.

If I sleep in, I find birds nesting in my beard.

You know in 1994, being down 3-1 and coming back to beat the Flames like we did galvanized that team and propelled them all they way to the Finals.

Getting through this kind of adversity, getting rewarded for the effort the team gave in games 6 and 7 - they know that nobody is going to beat them 4/7 games if they play that hard.

It's a real confidence booster. Not saying Nashville (or anyone else for that matter) will fall by the wayside but this Canuck Train has hit full speed and it's going to be tough to stop.

It could be worse. I have to shave between periods.

If I sleep in, I find birds nesting in my beard.

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/000/882/142/112575949_display_image.jpg?1303453275
Are you Shea Weber?

Don't get me wrong, the Hawks are an extremely good hockey team and it was some bum luck that the Canucks drew them in the first round, as they were by no means the weakest Western playoff team. That said, I think all that Toews really 'exposed' is that when the Canucks are suffering from illness, they are beatable. In all the games where the Canucks were relatively healthy, they were the better team.

There is zero chance that there was nothing physiological behind the two blowout Chicago wins. That was adversity at its fullest, not a 'choke' or some psychological fragility.

And Toews' comments at 0-3 in the series were still really inappropriate, and any Canuck saying something like that would have been roasted on HFBoards.

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/000/882/142/112575949_display_image.jpg?1303453275
Are you Shea Weber?

More like this guy:

http://baltimoresportsreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/mara.jpg

If I didn't have to shave every day for my job, I'd be like that all the time. The upside is, this time of year is considered a good thing. The rest of the year... not so much.

More like this guy:

http://baltimoresportsreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/mara.jpg

:amazed:

WE wanted the Hawks. We got them. They pushed us to the limits. We won. This team has got to be prepared for anything now. The Hawks have awaken the monster.

If the hawks dont get so many breaks from the reffs they arent nearly as tough to beat.

I don't think either team got exposed lol You guys beat them by one goal, so if your hinting that Chicago did, so did Vancouver just as much.

It's going to be tough for the Canucks to win the Cup, going through a grueling series like this. Nashville will be just as tough. They actually will punish you.

It's going to be tough for the Canucks to win the Cup, going through a grueling series like this. Nashville will be just as tough. They actually will punish you.

The big difference will be that, even though Nashville is a better opponent, Vancouver probably won't be screwing up their own game so royally anymore.

You guys were inches away from the biggest upset since Vimy Ridge! The Canucks won, but not before being exposed by the Blackhawks.

Canucks didn't show up for games 4 or 5 and made that series much more difficult than it had to be.

Full marks to Chicago for taking advantage of it, but watch games 1,2,3,6,7. That is how the Canucks normally play.

You guys were inches away from the biggest upset since Vimy Ridge! The Canucks won, but not before being exposed by the Blackhawks.

Hawks exposed the Canucks for what they can be, not what they are

Burrows' goal similar to Hossa's OT winner last year in game 4 vs Preds- inches away from being upset wOO

The Blackhawks forced the Canucks to come together and play as disciplined 5 man units, box out the crease, block a ton of shots, take away the passing lanes and forecheck relentlessly. In short, they played as a team and played with an edge - exactly the way they'll have to continue playing in the playoffs.

So, yes, Jonathan Toews was correct in that he exposed the soft underbelly of a team that went up 3-0 on them. But the adversity ended up making the Canucks a better team and ended up revealing the playoff style team they needed to become.

Honestly, if we play like we did in games 6 and 7 of this series the rest of the way, we are going to be an absolute mother to put away.

No disrespect to Shea as a player, but his beard is totally overrated. It's not thick, it's just really long.

History has shown that you are going to need a short series somewhere along the trip in order to win the cup, and history is also against teams that take 7 games to win the first round. Not saying its not possible or anything, but its going to be a lot tougher than some people in this thread seem to be thinking.

Nashville has less skill than the Hawks but can roll 4 lines and will absolutely wreck you if possible, and has one of the top coaches in the west behind the bench. Then after that you have to deal with the crazy depth of the sharks or the poise and experience of the Wings.

I can't say much about the sharks cause I don't watch them often but watch out if you pull the wings, the style of game the nucks play the wings tend to feed off of and play very well against (generally, not all the time, maybe the nucks skill can overcome, I do think the nucks are the better team)

Toews showed that if you're a talented team and never give up, you can beat anybody, no matter what the storyline.

IMO what he demonstrated more than anything is that the Blackhawks are no more than a couple of solid depth signings away from being a dominant team again. If they can pawn Huet off on someone again, they have enough room to sign two Malhotra's - how good would that team with two Malhotras be? Yikes.

I think you are reading too much in to some post game comments after game 3. I'm sure he was trying to light a fire under his team mates.

Can't trust a guy who can't grow a full beard.

LOL

jsaTElBljOE

To all the Canuck haters "coming in peace" - it just shows that Vancouver is doing the most important thing correctly: Winning... at any cost. The hate for Burrows reminds me of another 30 goal agitator from years ago... It's actually attracting some fans outside the Vancouver fan base...this is exactly where the team should be. For years the stigma was that Vancouver lacked "grit"....that was the only thing missing in the team game..well, not anymore.


To everyone coming on here and stating Nashville will "wreck" the Canucks - please! They can try..and that's about all they can do. Mike Fisher? Are you kidding me? I've watched him stink it up in Ottawa for years? Hornqvist? Stevie Sullivan? Erat? Those guys are going to get crushed and exposed before the Sedins do. And Pekke RInnie, despite his "vezina trophy" finalist nomination..is more overrated that miikka kiprusoff.

I see Detroit as being the only team left to give the Canucks trouble. San Jose will choke eventually like they always do..weather it be against Detroit or Vancouver. It never matters what the Sharks do in the regular season..they'll find a way to mess it up. Niemi looked shaky at best vs. the Kings. The Wings just have experience and know-how that Vancouver doesn't have yet. As much as I shouldn't say it - I just don't see Nashville as much of a threat at all to the Canucks. This will be there "short series" on their road to the cup.

This is ofcourse just my two cents.

I see Detroit as being the only team left to give the Canucks trouble.

Then we've learned nothing.

Then we've learned nothing.

I hope if Van plays Det..that Van wins. Det just has that playoff experience Van doesn't have yet...meaning some of those guys have won multiple cups...they know how to get the job done. If Van beats Det..they will attain that experience. It can only be attained by beating a team like DET in the conference finals.

I hope if Van plays Det..that Van wins. Det just has that playoff experience Van doesn't have yet...meaning some of those guys have won multiple cups...they know how to get the job done. If Van beats Det..they will attain that experience. It can only be attained by beating a team like DET in the conference finals.

First things first, beat Nashville.

First things first, beat Nashville.

This. Times two.

He suggested the Canucks weren't deserving of the respect they were being given.

For awhile it looked like he was right.

But now the real Canucks have sent the Stanley Cup champions out the door.

Who got exposed?

Not the Canucks.

:laugh: yeah, you barely squeaked by a team that backed its way into the playoffs and was pretty much terrible all year. Yep, you look like real world beaters right about now :shakehead

:laugh: yeah, you barely squeaked by a team that backed its way into the playoffs and was pretty much terrible all year. Yep, you look like real world beaters right about now :shakehead

It's time to give the yank a little lesson in the new NHL. Squeeked by the back door? Yes it was close but you need just over 90 points to make the playoffs now in the NHL. That means you have to be good almost all season long. Back in the day - you're Blackhawks could make the playoffs with 55 points when you played in the Norris division. Every team is good in the NHL playoffs now. Anything can happen. I would suggest you're looking the Canucks took games 4 and 5 off. The minute they woke up your team lost.

Say hi to Toews on the golf course for me...

First things first, beat Nashville.

Like there is any serious doubt that will happen. I would suggest to Canuck haters that you should not let your "hate" get in the way of your judgement. (not claiming you are a hater of the canucks) Nashville reminds me of the Buffalo Sabres of the western conference. The Little Engine that "sort of" could due to elite goaltending (as suggested by hockey media, and rinne's vezina trophy nomination).

It's time to give the yank a little lesson in the new NHL. Squeeked by the back door? Yes it was close but you need just over 90 points to make the playoffs now in the NHL. That means you have to be good almost all season long. Back in the day - you're Blackhawks could make the playoffs with 55 points when you played in the Norris division. Every team is good in the NHL playoffs now. Anything can happen. I would suggest you're looking the Canucks took games 4 and 5 off. The minute they woke up your team lost.

Say hi to Toews on the golf course for me...

Say hi yourself, you'll be there soon enough.


And nice faulty logic there. Having over 90 pts doesn't mean you are a good team, it only means you are a product of the ridiculous 3pt game system of today's NHL. You don't need to be good to get 90pts, in fact, you need to be pretty terrible to NOT get 90pts.

As someone who watched every Hawks game this year let me be the first to let you in on a little truth...the Hawks were at best a mediocre team and aside from one 8 game winning streak late in the season they were basically garbage all year.

So, you can try and rationalize your President's Trophy winning team barely squeaking by a garbage team all you want, but the facts are that the #1 team in the league barely made it out of the first round vs a team that only got into the playoffs because the Minnesota Wild won a game on the last day of the season. :laugh:


But, in the long run at least I'll have the memories of the recent Stanley Cup to look back on over the summer, all you'll have is the memories of that one time you beat a #8 seed in game 7. Rock on:yo:

I think more so than anything he exposed the real Chicago. After those comments they started to play much much better.

I don't think Chicago really should have been the 8th seed, I think they're a much better team than Nashville or Phoenix or LA.

Say hi yourself, you'll be there soon enough.


And nice faulty logic there. Having over 90 pts doesn't mean you are a good team, it only means you are a product of the ridiculous 3pt game system of today's NHL. You don't need to be good to get 90pts, in fact, you need to be pretty terrible to NOT get 90pts.

As someone who watched every Hawks game this year let me be the first to let you in on a little truth...the Hawks were at best a mediocre team and aside from one 8 game winning streak late in the season they were basically garbage all year.

So, you can try and rationalize your President's Trophy winning team barely squeaking by a garbage team all you want, but the facts are that the #1 team in the league barely made it out of the first round vs a team that only got into the playoffs because the Minnesota Wild won a game on the last day of the season. :laugh:


But, in the long run at least I'll have the memories of the recent Stanley Cup to look back on over the summer, all you'll have is the memories of that one time you beat a #8 seed in game 7. Rock on:yo:

Your argument is that your own team sucks? Alright, you win.

Your argument is that your own team sucks? Alright, you win.



yep, that basically sums it up.


And of course you guys barely beat a team that sucks so what does that say for your chances? :help:

Your argument is that your own team sucks? Alright, you win.

Ahahahahaha. Awesome.

yep, that basically sums it up.


And of course you guys barely beat a team that sucks so what does that say for your chances? :help:

We won, that's all I care about. 4 game sweep or OT goal in game 7, what matters is we won. Hard to say if we'll beat Nashville, I think we will. They don't have the star power that Chicago has, though it's not the stars that almost came back to win the series.

Say hi yourself, you'll be there soon enough.


And nice faulty logic there. Having over 90 pts doesn't mean you are a good team, it only means you are a product of the ridiculous 3pt game system of today's NHL. You don't need to be good to get 90pts, in fact, you need to be pretty terrible to NOT get 90pts.

As someone who watched every Hawks game this year let me be the first to let you in on a little truth...the Hawks were at best a mediocre team and aside from one 8 game winning streak late in the season they were basically garbage all year.

So, you can try and rationalize your President's Trophy winning team barely squeaking by a garbage team all you want, but the facts are that the #1 team in the league barely made it out of the first round vs a team that only got into the playoffs because the Minnesota Wild won a game on the last day of the season. :laugh:


But, in the long run at least I'll have the memories of the recent Stanley Cup to look back on over the summer, all you'll have is the memories of that one time you beat a #8 seed in game 7. Rock on:yo:

We will have forgotten about this series (except the legendary Burrows goal) by the third game into the Nashville series..while you sit and stir over the dagger in your heart...all summer long..and into next season..into the next time you're in the playoffs. Hurts doesn't it? I guess by your logic the Hawks may not even make it to the playoffs next year. Oh well... spin it how you want... Nucks took 2 games off..it's the only reason the series was close. Plus the homer Chicago refs really helped too. I say that because I find that all original six clubs have homer refs in their home rinks.

yep, that basically sums it up.


And of course you guys barely beat a team that sucks so what does that say for your chances? :help:


Are hawks fans this bitter and such a sore loser? :shakehead

Give it up... go cheer the bulls or something and live a little. Don't be so bitter....

Let's be honest here. The deplorable Hawks in the regular season were:

-4th in GF
-12th in GA (and I think a lot had to do with Turco playing so much to start the year)
-4th in PP
-25th in PK (the one stat that is bad...of course the canucks never got any PPs)
-7th in goal differential

Not to mention they had a whole heck of a lot of experience in winning the Cup and can still boast 4 superb forwards in Toews, Kane, Hossa, and Sharp with some nice depth with bolland and Brouwer. A team that can easily ice three good to great lines...more than most teams. On the back end they have 4 D-men that can play in the top 4 of any team in the league. And Crawford showed he can play in the playoffs.

They may have been frustratingly inconsistent in the regular season but there is no way they were a "bad" team or even mediocre. They were a good team that happened to underachieve during the regular season but had the experience and horses to turn it on a bit playoffs.

That said, the series never should have made it past game 5 though I think based on the play in games 1,2,3,6 and 7 it is obvious that there was something up with the canucks in game 4 and 5 beyond lack of effort. Many players were getting practices off for no apparent reason. Even if it ended in 5 games it was never going to be a cake walk each game. The Hawks are a good enough team that you need to bring an A game or pretty darn close to beat them. That can't be said of a lot of 8th seeds. For example if Dallas hadn't choked against the Wild the canucks could have likely beat them while sleeping.

I think Toews saw the same thing anyone who was looking at that series rationally saw...two teams not playing playoff hockey. The Hawks looked tired, scattered and disinterested through the first three games. And after the first period of game one, so did the Canucks. They played down to the opposition, were sloppy and loose, and gave every indication they were a team that was eminently beatable. Toews saw it, the Hawks woke up, and you saw the results in games 4 and 5.

The level of effort and compete from the Canucks in games 6 and 7 was on a whole other level than what they showed in games 1-5. That's what they need, through 4 rounds, if they want a cup. It doesn't matter how good their regular season went. This is the playoffs. They can't be taking any more nights off.

Toews seemed out of character and ocky his series, and kane was clm and repectful. It was like someone switched their identities.

We will have forgotten about this series (except the legendary Burrows goal) by the third game into the Nashville series..while you sit and stir over the dagger in your heart...all summer long..and into next season..into the next time you're in the playoffs. Hurts doesn't it? I guess by your logic the Hawks may not even make it to the playoffs next year. Oh well... spin it how you want... Nucks took 2 games off..it's the only reason the series was close. Plus the homer Chicago refs really helped too. I say that because I find that all original six clubs have homer refs in their home rinks.


The Chelsea Dagger?:sarcasm:

Luongo needs to steal a few games for nucks.
And the sedin's need to score.
Than this nonsense will stop.

The Hawks did expose the Canucks as a team that given some adversity, they don't always respond so favourably.

After 3 games the Canucks were looking unbeatable.

Everyone in the playoffs knows that isn't true.

Hopefully the lessons learned by the Canucks will carry over into the next (and hopefully) later rounds.

More like this guy:

http://baltimoresportsreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/mara.jpg

If I didn't have to shave every day for my job, I'd be like that all the time. The upside is, this time of year is considered a good thing. The rest of the year... not so much.

Nothing beats this one, Im sorry

http://www.skunkpost.com/user/DanFisher/images/img_1245.jpg

To the moron from Chicago touting his Hawks as weak and meagre; what would you be saying had they won the series?

Here, let me answer that for you. You would be saying how this team never deserved to be the 8th seed, how they were not much different than the cup winning team, how your big 4 up front plus 2 all star defensemen and an up-and-coming goalie were the core of the NEW Hawks. We would be hearing it through the nose about how great your Hawks were.

Reality has set in now. Your Hawks lost to a superior opponent. There is no easy route to drinking out of Lord Stanley's Cup. I remember Gretzky saying after he lost to the Isles in the cup finals that as he looked in their dressing room he saw a bunch of guys who were exhausted, beaten up, bloody and bruised.

The Canucks will not walk easily through Nashville. Can they beat them? Of course. Each series will present new challenges, some players will falter, others will rise to the occasion, but they will win playing like the TEAM we saw in game 7.

Reality has set in now. Your Hawks lost to a superior opponent. There is no easy route to drinking out of Lord Stanley's Cup. I remember Gretzky saying after he lost to the Isles in the cup finals that as he looked in their dressing room he saw a bunch of guys who were exhausted, beaten up, bloody and bruised.



It is on the DVD, he said he expected them to be freaking out after winning their 4th straight cup, but they weren't even celebrating, he said it helped him learn how to lose, and that helped him learned how to win, they came back and won the cup the next year, and the rest is history, now they are considered one of the greatest teams of all time.

The Hawks did expose the Canucks as a team that given some adversity, they don't always respond so favourably.

After 3 games the Canucks were looking unbeatable.

Everyone in the playoffs knows that isn't true.

Hopefully the lessons learned by the Canucks will carry over into the next (and hopefully) later rounds.

Did you watch the series? They won the first three games, but outside the first period of Game 1 looked far from unbeatable. Game 6 and 7, when they truly faced adversity, were by far their best games of the series. As Henrik said, the Hawks had no business being in either of them. Kudos to Chicago for pushing both games to OT, but they were dominated in both those games.

It is on the DVD, he said he expected them to be freaking out after winning their 4th straight cup, but they weren't even celebrating, he said it helped him learn how to lose, and that helped him learned how to win, they came back and won the cup the next year, and the rest is history, now they are considered one of the greatest teams of all time.

Which DVD? I've never seen the DVD. I think I read this in his auto-biography like 15 years ago. Losing helps you learn how to win. It's true in most things in life.

Luongo's confidence is as ugly as Ulanov's face. No wonder the Canucks are block shots like Ulanov. LOL

Blocking shots and lanes. Everyone plays their part to prevent the preds from getting good shots on goal. It's not necessarily a bad thing. Oilers was a pretty good shot blocking team in the 05/06 playoffs. I started noticing this in the Hawks series too.

Luongo's confidence is as ugly as Ulanov's face. No wonder the Canucks are block shots like Ulanov. LOL

Blocking shots and lanes. Everyone plays their part to prevent the preds from getting good shots on goal. It's not necessarily a bad thing. Oilers was a pretty good shot blocking team in the 05/06 playoffs. I started noticing this in the Hawks series too.

Yeah Luongo looked so terrible when he stopped Fisher on his breakaway.

Give it a rest, Luongo earned his shutout tonight. Though the team did make some good shot blocks and I'm glad, most other teams going deep have been blocking shots, I didn't really see that from the nucks.

Nashville has the other Vezina nominee and they've got like 2 guys inside the crease with him at all times.

Yeah Luongo looked so terrible when he stopped Fisher on his breakaway.

Give it a rest, Luongo earned his shutout tonight. Though the team did make some good shot blocks and I'm glad, most other teams going deep have been blocking shots, I didn't really see that from the nucks.

Looked even worse getting his glove on that Weber shot into a half-empty net. (yes, he did actually save that contrary to what the media seems to think)

The canucks showed their inexperience and lacked the killer instinct by being complete no-shows for games 4 and 5. Chicago took the bull by the horns and made the Canucks pay.

The Blackhawks exposed the Canucks HUGE problems with defending in transition to their D-Zone. This was part of the reason why Luongo gave up some of those bad goals.

The Blackhawks exposed the Canucks HUGE problems with defending in transition to their D-Zone. This was part of the reason why Luongo gave up some of those bad goals.

Now was this only in games 4 & 5, or could it be seen through the series? I don't think the Hawks really exposed anything about the Canucks, who asides from those two games dominated the play in the 5 other games. The Hawks got there game plan worked out by games 6 & 7 putting up a much better fight than the first 3 games and even narrowly taking game 6, but the Canucks were still the better team on the ice. And with the way everything worked out I'm inclined to believe the rumour from a low key but proven insider that the Canucks locker room was suffering from the flu those two games. It makes a lot more sense than they just buckled under the pressure that badly.

Disclaimer: I can't read the game well enough to see this weakness in the transition game you're talking about, so just wanted to see if what you're talking about was only apparent in games 5 & 6.

The Blackhawks exposed the Canucks HUGE problems with defending in transition to their D-Zone. This was part of the reason why Luongo gave up some of those bad goals.

What bad goals are you talking about? I can remember maybe 2 that Luongo would like back. I'm guessing you're just buying the easy media storyline that Luongo fell apart in games 5 & 6 when in fact the whole team in front of him disappeared.

Kinda unrelated to this thread, but anyone else thought our series against the Hawks was like watching a horror movie?

Everything starts out nicely, a family of three moves into a house, they make friends, get to know the neighbourhood and settle down nicely (3Ws in a row)... Then BAM comes the murderer/monster/ghost, kills off their pet dog, one of their cousins and friends staying over for the holidays (3Ls in a row). The parents and child escapes narrowly (Burrows goal), but only to be cornered into an alley by the antagonist (Toews goal). Well... I guess this normally doesn't happen in horror movies, but the antagonist slips on a banana peel (Campoli's turnover) and the family finds a way to escape in the end.

Kinda unrelated to this thread, but anyone else thought our series against the Hawks was like watching a horror movie?

Everything starts out nicely, a family of three moves into a house, they make friends, get to know the neighbourhood and settle down nicely (3Ws in a row)... Then BAM comes the murderer/monster/ghost, kills off their pet dog, one of their cousins and friends staying over for the holidays (3Ls in a row). The parents and child escapes narrowly (Burrows goal), but only to be cornered into an alley by the antagonist (Toews goal). Well... I guess this normally doesn't happen in horror movies, but the antagonist slips on a banana peel (Campoli's turnover) and the family finds a way to escape in the end.

i like the comparison. but when toews scored that shorthander, it sure felt like the ending to funny games.