Shaw is off to a poor start playing center but he did show a hint of improvement last night. Whether or not he can be the effective player (as out 3rd center) he was as a rookie winger is questionable. Q can’t wait too long for him to pick it up, but if he does I can see him filling that 3rd line center role. Stan’s priority is pretty clear to me: goaltending. The team is far from perfect but doesn’t look too bad other than in the nets.
And those that insist on quoting stats to defend Crawford, please stop. If it weren’t for a few alert plays by Keith, and another by Kruger to save us from embarrassingly soft goals, our record would look quite different.
Shaw is off to a poor start playing center but he did show a hint of improvement last night. Whether or not he can be the effective player (as out 3rd center) he was as a rookie winger is questionable. Q can’t wait too long for him to pick it up, but if he does I can see him filling that 3rd line center role. Stan’s priority is pretty clear to me: goaltending. The team is far from perfect but doesn’t look too bad other than in the nets.
And those that insist on quoting stats to defend Crawford, please stop. If it weren’t for a few alert plays by Keith, and another by Kruger to save us from embarrassingly soft goals, our record would look quite different.
What ifs, dude.
It's hilarious how the Crawford haters just see what they want to see. Crawford gave up 2 goals?? OMG worst goalie! Nevermind that Rozi gave the puck away on the 2nd goal and Keith & Seabs both ****ed up on the first goal. Your two "star" d-men hung their goalie out to dry there and who is to blame? Crawford. Yikes.
or some variation of it. Saad has been playing really well but Stalberg is getting shafted a bit with Bickell and Shaw. Don't think there is really a solution other than changing it up if the Hawks need scoring in a game.
I think Kruger can be that man.
So with a solid 1B and a little luck ya never know!
Even if he can, we have no depth at Center and we only have 3 in the NHL
Quote:
Originally Posted by BronYrAur
What ifs, dude.
It's hilarious how the Crawford haters just see what they want to see. Crawford gave up 2 goals?? OMG worst goalie! Nevermind that Rozi gave the puck away on the 2nd goal and Keith & Seabs both ****ed up on the first goal. Your two "star" d-men hung their goalie out to dry there and who is to blame? Crawford. Yikes.
he isn't wrong with what he said. If Keith wouldn't save his ass twice, we are not a 4-0-0 team. Yesterday we would have gone into the 3rd being 3 goals behind
It's hilarious how the Crawford haters just see what they want to see. Crawford gave up 2 goals?? OMG worst goalie! Nevermind that Rozi gave the puck away on the 2nd goal and Keith & Seabs both ****ed up on the first goal. Your two "star" d-men hung their goalie out to dry there and who is to blame? Crawford. Yikes.
This is the logic of so many people and it baffles me. The D didn't play perfectly what do you want the goalie to do? STOP THE PUCK! It's his job, again if Crawford didn't turn almost every defensive mistake into a goal then it wouldn't be an issue.
So we are going to bash our D because if they don't play perfect our goalie can't bail them out, that makes perfect sense and puts no pressure on them. "Hey guys if you don't play 100% perfect it's a goal because our goalie isn't very good" But why change anything with the goalie position it's perfect.
This is the logic of so many people and it baffles me. The D didn't play perfectly what do you want the goalie to do? STOP THE PUCK! It's his job, again if Crawford didn't turn almost every defensive mistake into a goal then it wouldn't be an issue.
So we are going to bash our D because if they don't play perfect our goalie can't bail them out, that makes perfect sense and puts no pressure on them. "Hey guys if you don't play 100% perfect it's a goal because our goalie isn't very good" But why change anything with the goalie position it's perfect.
At least what I used is logic....
On the other hand, your argument holds no water because it can be used in just the opposite way....
So we are going to bash our G because if he doesn't play perfect our D can't play well enough to keep the other team from having multiple breakaways or open looks in front of the goalie?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba88
he isn't wrong with what he said. If Keith wouldn't save his ass twice, we are not a 4-0-0 team. Yesterday we would have gone into the 3rd being 3 goals behind
Yet another dreadful argument where you are creating a narrative to what happened. And Crawford came up very large with a 32-save evening against the Blues. Without that excellent effort the Hawks probably lose. T
hat's a nonsense argument because it's a team effort yet when a goal goes in, the Crawford haters jump on him and blame him entirely. I guess it probably has something to do with so many Hawks fans' unwillingness to pin anything on the fan favorites Seabs & Keith....
On the other hand, your argument holds no water because it can be used in just the opposite way....
So we are going to bash our G because if he doesn't play perfect our D can't play well enough to keep the other team from having multiple breakaways or open looks in front of the goalie?
No we aren't going to start calling our goalie great or wonderful because of a few good, not even great games. Yes D makes mistakes, it's up to your goalie to prevent those mistakes from ending up in the back of the net.
If Keith doesn't stop 2 goals in 2 games, the St. Louis game goes to OT, we are down 3-0 going into the 3rd last night and maybe the Hawks are 2-0-2 and not 4-0-0.
The first goal last night hit Crawford, don't care what the D did if the puck hits you, you need to stop it as a goalie. Yes Crawford has played better, but better isn't great, and if you ask me do I have confidence in Crawford that no matter what he can win us a game the answer is no. Not taking 2010 into account because that was a fluke not the norm how many goalies who you don't feel can atleast steal you a game here or there win a Cup? It's a small, small list.
It's hilarious how the Crawford haters just see what they want to see. Crawford gave up 2 goals?? OMG worst goalie! Nevermind that Rozi gave the puck away on the 2nd goal and Keith & Seabs both ****ed up on the first goal. Your two "star" d-men hung their goalie out to dry there and who is to blame? Crawford. Yikes.
No kidding, those who have a seething rage for Crawford don't realize that other teams also make plays that save their goaltenders a**. To them if they didn't watch it....it didn't happen.
Crawford has only let in 6 goals so far this season. The first one (vs LA) was a point shot that he couldn't see due to a screen. The second goal (vs LA) happened after he was taken out by his own d-man. The third goal (vs STL) came on a 2-1 caused by a bad line change and Nick Leddy being way out of position. The fourth (vs STL) came on a pp and was Oshie wide open on the side of the net to tap in a rebound. The fifth (vs Dal) came on a partial break by Eriksson. The sixth (vs Dal) came when the Hawks failed to clear the zone and left Whitney wide open in front of the net.
Out of those six goals how many do you honestly think any other goalie would have stopped? And what about Crawford repeatedly shutting the door at the end of the game vs the Blues when the defense couldn't clear the puck out of the zone? Does another goalie automatically make all those saves because if Crawford could do it anyone can?
If the defense continues to repeatedly fail at clearing the puck and giving up breakaways it won't matter who is in goal because the Hawks will still have to score 3-4 goals a game to win.
Crawford has only let in 6 goals so far this season. The first one (vs LA) was a point shot that he couldn't see due to a screen. The second goal (vs LA) happened after he was taken out by his own d-man. The third goal (vs STL) came on a 2-1 caused by a bad line change and Nick Leddy being way out of position. The fourth (vs STL) came on a pp and was Oshie wide open on the side of the net to tap in a rebound. The fifth (vs Dal) came on a partial break by Eriksson. The sixth (vs Dal) came when the Hawks failed to clear the zone and left Whitney wide open in front of the net.
Out of those six goals how many do you honestly think any other goalie would have stopped? And what about Crawford repeatedly shutting the door at the end of the game vs the Blues when the defense couldn't clear the puck out of the zone? Does another goalie automatically make all those saves because if Crawford could do it anyone can?
If the defense continues to repeatedly fail at clearing the puck and giving up breakaways it won't matter who is in goal because the Hawks will still have to score 3-4 goals a game to win.
I have to agree with this. On a somewhat related note, if teams like Phoenix can make goalies look with their defence, why can't we?
or some variation of it. Saad has been playing really well but Stalberg is getting shafted a bit with Bickell and Shaw. Don't think there is really a solution other than changing it up if the Hawks need scoring in a game.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Saad looks solid, but playing on the first line, he needs to score or set up a few for his linemates. I kinda figured Q would do this as he obviously loves Saad's game ... and we are winning, so I doubt he will shuffle the top 6 at this point, but Saad needs to generate more offense. It is a short season and no team can afford to be toooo patient, waiting for a youngster to develop in the top 6, and in doing so, not have the best line combinations possible. Again, I like Saad but there is nothing wrong with him gaining experience on the 3rd line, and possibly give him some PP time to keep his confidence up.
This is the logic of so many people and it baffles me. The D didn't play perfectly what do you want the goalie to do? STOP THE PUCK! It's his job, again if Crawford didn't turn almost every defensive mistake into a goal then it wouldn't be an issue.
So we are going to bash our D because if they don't play perfect our goalie can't bail them out, that makes perfect sense and puts no pressure on them. "Hey guys if you don't play 100% perfect it's a goal because our goalie isn't very good" But why change anything with the goalie position it's perfect.
Uhhh, Crawford has made lots of saves when he has needed to.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Saad looks solid, but playing on the first line, he needs to score or set up a few for his linemates. I kinda figured Q would do this as he obviously loves Saad's game ... and we are winning, so I doubt he will shuffle the top 6 at this point, but Saad needs to generate more offense. It is a short season and no team can afford to be toooo patient, waiting for a youngster to develop in the top 6, and in doing so, not have the best line combinations possible. Again, I like Saad but there is nothing wrong with him gaining experience on the 3rd line, and possibly give him some PP time to keep his confidence up.
Everyone loves Saad's game but you. You are always wrong about everything.
Crawford has only let in 6 goals so far this season. The first one (vs LA) was a point shot that he couldn't see due to a screen. The second goal (vs LA) happened after he was taken out by his own d-man. The third goal (vs STL) came on a 2-1 caused by a bad line change and Nick Leddy being way out of position. The fourth (vs STL) came on a pp and was Oshie wide open on the side of the net to tap in a rebound. The fifth (vs Dal) came on a partial break by Eriksson. The sixth (vs Dal) came when the Hawks failed to clear the zone and left Whitney wide open in front of the net.
Out of those six goals how many do you honestly think any other goalie would have stopped?
I'd say 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 were all at least theoretically stoppable.
On 1, he was taking a very weird angle to try to see around the screen and leaving two-thirds of the net open.
On 4, some rebound control would have gone a long way.
Everyone loves Saad's game but you. You are always wrong about everything.
I didn't say I didn't like his game. Perhaps you should read my post again.
You make me chuckle "no hit, no grit, no face off, no finish your check" man. You are the clueless one and frankly I'm getting a bit sick of your personal attacks!
Crawford has only let in 6 goals so far this season. The first one (vs LA) was a point shot that he couldn't see due to a screen. The second goal (vs LA) happened after he was taken out by his own d-man. The third goal (vs STL) came on a 2-1 caused by a bad line change and Nick Leddy being way out of position. The fourth (vs STL) came on a pp and was Oshie wide open on the side of the net to tap in a rebound. The fifth (vs Dal) came on a partial break by Eriksson. The sixth (vs Dal) came when the Hawks failed to clear the zone and left Whitney wide open in front of the net.
Out of those six goals how many do you honestly think any other goalie would have stopped? And what about Crawford repeatedly shutting the door at the end of the game vs the Blues when the defense couldn't clear the puck out of the zone? Does another goalie automatically make all those saves because if Crawford could do it anyone can?
If the defense continues to repeatedly fail at clearing the puck and giving up breakaways it won't matter who is in goal because the Hawks will still have to score 3-4 goals a game to win.
More then Crawford,
Yes he was screened, did he do anything about that, move to see, push the player, no he stood there as a puck flew past him.
Knocked over, and then what? He flailed around the ice like a fish instead of standing back up and making a save.
Ok, so the defense made a bad play, bail them out, instead Crawford and his weak 5 hold get picked apart by Andy McDonald, a good player but won't get confused with Stamkos anytime soon, a save he could have made.
The goal against Ericksson was all on Crawford, the puck hit him, fine it was a partial breakaway, guess what it happens, when the guy shoots the puck into you, you need to stop it.
Let's not forget the 2 times he was way out of position and Keith bailed him out stopping 2 goals, both of them in 1 goal games that could have lead to loses.
This is where crappy goaltending has left Hawks fans, when a goalie is playing good, but still making mistakes and giving up goals he shouldn't people are ready to praise him as the greatest thing to ever live.
Has Crawford been better then last year yes, do I have confidence in him to lead this team to Ws no matter what NO! He is what he is, a solid goalie who even on his best nights can't keep a puck out of the net. That doesn't win.
Has Crawford been better then last year yes, do I have confidence in him to lead this team to Ws no matter what NO! He is what he is, a solid goalie who even on his best nights can't keep a puck out of the net. That doesn't win.
So according to you if the Hawks had another goalie they would have only given up what 3 combined goals in those games? Because any other goalie would have made all the saves that Crawford made and some of the ones he didn't?
So the poke check that stopped an opposing player from being all alone in front of the net is a play that better goalies would have made as well. Shutting the door on the Blues at the end of the game when the defense couldn't clear the zone is something any other goalie would have done. Coming up with a big save on a penalty shot to keep it a one goal game against the Stars is something that any other goalie would have done.
I'm not saying Crawford is a great goalie. I'm not even saying he is a good goalie. But he has repeatedly bailed the defense out when they make bad plays. The problem is the amount of bad plays the defense is making. What I am saying is there is not a single goaltender in the league that will consistently win behind this defense if the offense isn't scoring at least 3 goals a game.
Crawford has only let in 6 goals so far this season. The first one (vs LA) was a point shot that he couldn't see due to a screen. The second goal (vs LA) happened after he was taken out by his own d-man. The third goal (vs STL) came on a 2-1 caused by a bad line change and Nick Leddy being way out of position. The fourth (vs STL) came on a pp and was Oshie wide open on the side of the net to tap in a rebound. The fifth (vs Dal) came on a partial break by Eriksson. The sixth (vs Dal) came when the Hawks failed to clear the zone and left Whitney wide open in front of the net.
Out of those six goals how many do you honestly think any other goalie would have stopped? And what about Crawford repeatedly shutting the door at the end of the game vs the Blues when the defense couldn't clear the puck out of the zone? Does another goalie automatically make all those saves because if Crawford could do it anyone can?
If the defense continues to repeatedly fail at clearing the puck and giving up breakaways it won't matter who is in goal because the Hawks will still have to score 3-4 goals a game to win.
You can say with a straight face that none of the goals this year have been on Crawford? Are you a politician?
