Well, Chicago certainly answered back, didn't they?! The good news is there's a little more leg room on the bandwagon this morning.
Chicago Tribune writer Steve Rosenboom, who has been covering the series with a rollercoaster of emotions usually reserved for teenagers, chimed in with this:
"The Hawks played with urgency from the start. So did the Canucks. But eventually, the Canucks decided they didn’t want to pay the price to make a play, or even be the aggressors the way they had in winning the first three games. It’s that mentality that makes people question Vancouver’s Stanley Cup credibility. Winners don’t turtle like that."
He has a point. Canuck fans should not worry so much about the loss, but more about the response in what is looming to be a surprisingly important game 5. If they return to their strong play on Thursday night in game 5, they will be fine. For whatever reason the Canucks were playing not to lose in game 4, rather than to win. That rarely works in big playoff games.
Here's some more news, notes, and thoughts:
- The Sedins will probably be the ones with the most heat on them in the aftermath. That was one of the worst games I've seen them play since the lockout. They need a strong performance on Thursday to quiet their critics.
- I have been historically very critical of Alain Vigneault's in-game coaching. I thought leaving Luongo in goal to start the third period was just bizarre. That game was not Luongo's fault, so why leave him in there. The team and the coach hung their goaltender out to dry in game 4.
- I saw this on Twitter and I'm not sure of the accuracy of it, but apparently Roberto Luongo has allowed 6 goals or more on 6 different occasions in his career - all six times were courtesy of the Blackhawks.
- Like the few other players who truly excel in a third line role, David Bolland has long been one of my favorites. Injuries have plagued his regular seasons, but that being said, I keep waiting for him to have a breakout year offensively.
Post a Comment