At least the Hawks are still playing and not doing rails at the pool in vegas.

–I guess we should broach this whole goalie thing which is taking on levels of stupid that usually are reserved for the gridiron in this city.

First of all, I don’t know when “riding the hot hand” became a goalie that had one really nice game. Let’s remember this: In the final 20 games when Joel Quenneville desperately needed the Hawks to gain points in the standings, he turned to Corey Crawford 17 of those times and only used Scott Darling in back-to-back situations or meaningless games.

This isn’t an ’08-09 situation when he alternated between Nikolai Khabibulin and Cristobal Huet or a ’09-10 situation where he shielded Antii Niemi with favorable starts until he ultimately turned to him. Scott Darling was an absolute afterthought and no one ever said “HEY WHAT ABOUT PLAYING DAT LOCAL GUY WHO SPENT 15 YEARS LIVING IN DA SUBURBS BUT HAS ALSO LIVED JUST AS MUCH TIME OUT OF DA GREAT STATE OF ILLINOIS, MY FRENTS.”

If Corey Crawford has proved anything, it’s that he deserves the benefit of the doubt. We can literally go down the list of times he’s bounced back from stinkbombs if that would make any one feel better. But I really don’t think this warrants that.

Sure, for now.

Committed Indian taking the expected anti-meatball stance:



Tpyical Team Bernstein mentality. When your goalie is an astonishingly bad 38/47 and 6.75 through two games, who gets the hardest treatment? That's right, the fans! BRAP BRAP DIS DAT DA DA DITKA FRENTS BEARSE. Yeah, Crawford played well down the stretch, which was magnified by the fact that no one else on his team did. But this wasn't just a bad game. This was a complete meltdown to end the game. Crawford earned the benefit of the doubt going into game 2. He lost it. I don't think that's ridiculous.

But the thing is that Crawford hadn't been dreadful coming in at all. If he had been, they would have lost those BLues/Wild games by more than one goal. This whole roster is shit right now, really.

You (and I) have been critical of Cro all year, and have been screaming for a change to Darling...why you pick now to support him is odd. The best thing for the future of the Hawks would be for Darling fo continue to play well, thus allowing them to move Cro to another team and shed tnemselves of the ridiculous contract that Stan gave him. Stan is in a real slump of late.

Crow may have a no-movement clause, but not a no-trade, so I am sure there are plenty of teams that would consider him a huge upgrade and happily take on his $6M.

They certainly have the crowd mic mixed way down.