May 072009
 

What started as a best of 7, went to a best of 5, and then tonight after being tied up again is now down to a best of 3. The Canucks have home ice advantage playing two of the potentially remaining 3 games in the friendly confines of GM Place, but the Blackhawks have proven that no matter where they’re playing they have the comeback down to a science.

While the Canucks fixed one problem area in their game, they let up in another. I think back to the game tonight and am left scratching my head as to what actually happeened. The Canucks didn’t play badly, they didn’t play phenomenally either. They were just there… skating back and forth. In a season where Filet Mignon abandoned trap hockey and utilized his offensive weapons to capture the Northwest Division, tonight, out of nowhere, it was as if Jacques Lemaire had taken over control of the bench and the game hinged on boring.

Rypien’s heads up play was like an injection of adrenaline as the game picked up significantly after his second period tally, but neither team had any chances. Luongo was rarely tested, but when he was he seemed on top of his game. Neither team spent much sustained pressure in the offensive zone and apart from the desperation by the Blackhawks late in the third resulting in their tying goal with about two minutes left, the game seemed emotionless and empty; Even the United Center seemed strangely deflated, for no real reason.

With the series tied, it’s back to square one. Equal series wins apiece, the only difference being the two teams know a little more about each other’s play. Two at home, one on the road. The Canucks cannot afford to go back to the United Center facing a do-or-die game with their backs against the wall which makes taking advantage of Saturday’s home game 5 that much more pivotal. Saturday’s game could make or break the series and they have a lot to work on from now till then.

Blog Song: Sleepyhead by Passion Pit

  • William

    Unbelievable. Where were the Sedin Twins? And where is the committment to winning a Stanley Cup. Less than 3 minutes left and the Canucks blow it. Shocked and dissapointed. Chicago is a loser team.

  • William

    Unbelievable. Where were the Sedin Twins? And where is the committment to winning a Stanley Cup. Less than 3 minutes left and the Canucks blow it. Shocked and dissapointed. Chicago is a loser team.

  • Kel

    I think Saturday’s game is game 5, not 6 (See second last sentence in your article.) Also, I think the Sedins almost scored in OT. I also saw Sundin created offense. The Canucks didn’t play very well offensively, but I’m not quick to blame the coach. There were many plays that if they could handle the puck a little bit better (pass, shot), they could have scored. But because they didn’t handle those well enough; the passes didn’t connect and shots were either not on net or not taken. Once they lost possession, the team made the right plays defensively, so it looked like their only purpose was to protect the lead. In fact, it wouldn’t look like if they were sharper in the offensive zone.

  • Kel

    I think Saturday’s game is game 5, not 6 (See second last sentence in your article.) Also, I think the Sedins almost scored in OT. I also saw Sundin created offense. The Canucks didn’t play very well offensively, but I’m not quick to blame the coach. There were many plays that if they could handle the puck a little bit better (pass, shot), they could have scored. But because they didn’t handle those well enough; the passes didn’t connect and shots were either not on net or not taken. Once they lost possession, the team made the right plays defensively, so it looked like their only purpose was to protect the lead. In fact, it wouldn’t look like if they were sharper in the offensive zone.

  • http://www.canuckshockeyblog.com J.J. Guerrero

    I actually think the Canucks were instructed by the coach to protect the lead and nothing else. As soon as they got the puck, they chipped it out and went off on a change. Looking at the Time On Ice charts – http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20082009/TV030244.HTM – kinda confirms this. They were playing 20-30 second shifts in the 3rd period. This tells me they weren’t even thinking of offense.

  • http://www.canuckshockeyblog.com J.J. Guerrero

    I actually think the Canucks were instructed by the coach to protect the lead and nothing else. As soon as they got the puck, they chipped it out and went off on a change. Looking at the Time On Ice charts – http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20082009/TV030244.HTM – kinda confirms this. They were playing 20-30 second shifts in the 3rd period. This tells me they weren’t even thinking of offense.

  • Kel

    The shifts are short but I am not sure it’s not just an indication of the coach’s decision to have short shifts to preserve energy. The Canucks played like that in game 3 and were successful. The only difference is that they were better offensively and had a bigger lead.

  • Kel

    The shifts are short but I am not sure it’s not just an indication of the coach’s decision to have short shifts to preserve energy. The Canucks played like that in game 3 and were successful. The only difference is that they were better offensively and had a bigger lead.

%d bloggers like this: