The Blackhawks are back

[shocky2002 36]

Since winning the cup in 2015, they lost a lot of depth that offseason due to the Toews/Kane cap hits, and had been very overrated for the past year and a half. But they've made some nice moves here and there and have adapted to become less scoring oriented, but a more defensive, shut down-type of team. The favorites to win the Western Conference, no doubt. And also, by far, the toughest out in the playoffs.

 

The sweat is officially back on. They're on the hunt for #4.

Edited March 12, 2017 by shocky2002

[kipwinger 8,518]

4 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

And with the best captain in the league, it will be tough to beat them.

 

Don't forget, they've got the best coach too.  More wins than Arbour and just as many Cups as Bowman had with the Wings "dynasty" team. 

[GMRwings1983 8,793]

I thought this thread was started in 2009.  Then I looked, and saw it was started today.

What are they back from?  They won the Cup two years ago and had a good chance of winning it last year, but ran into a motivated St Louis team that eked them out in a tough series.  

What am I missing here?

[e_prime 1,936]

This thread started two days after they lose to us.     

 

I mean, I guess that game didn't have a lot of meaning for them... and they did have a solid win against Minny today.  ...but have they really been gone?

 

Edited March 12, 2017 by e_prime

[LeftWinger 4,948]

Well they better win it again in the next two years or they'll just be another team we were better than. We have 3 in 6, 4 in 11. They had 3 in 6 (no back to back) and they have 2 more seasons to beat 4 in 11. Until they best us, then there's no need to chastise the "dynasty." 

[kipwinger 8,518]

Lol.  Our "dynasty" is as meaningless as the Candiens or Islanders.  And I'm sure Chicago cares about ours as much as we cared about those other two. 

[kickazz 5,459]

We were probably a more popular dynasty because we had more big name players. Hard to have that in salary cap era. 

Edited March 12, 2017 by kickazz

[kliq 3,755]

2 hours ago, GMRwings1983 said:

I thought this thread was started in 2009.  Then I looked, and saw it was started today.

What are they back from?  They won the Cup two years ago and had a good chance of winning it last year, but ran into a motivated St Louis team that eked them out in a tough series.  

What am I missing here?

Nothing, you are 100% right. Its people being over the top.

[Echolalia 2,961]

22 minutes ago, kliq said:

Nothing, you are 100% right. Its people being over the top.

No one is above Toews and he is at the top.  Therefore OP is clearly not "over the top"

[LeftWinger 4,948]

2 hours ago, kipwinger said:

Lol.  Our "dynasty" is as meaningless as the Candiens or Islanders.  And I'm sure Chicago cares about ours as much as we cared about those other two. 

And Chicago's dynasty is just as meaningless to anyone not in Chicago, the ultimate bandwagon city...

[barabbas16 499]

6 hours ago, kipwinger said:

 

Don't forget, they've got the best coach too.  More wins than Arbour and just as many Cups as Bowman had with the Wings "dynasty" team. 

Yeah... he doesn't exactly have a stellar record against Detroit in the playoffs, though.  I think Detroit went through Quenneville at least each year they won the Cup, plus 2009.... I didn't verify that, so it might not be completely accurate.

3 hours ago, kipwinger said:

Lol.  Our "dynasty" is as meaningless as the Candiens or Islanders.  And I'm sure Chicago cares about ours as much as we cared about those other two. 

When you say "Chicago" there, do you mean the organization, the fans, or both?  Because I would assume that Chicago fans are no less than thrilled to see the Red Wings down and out this year.

[kliq 3,755]

7 minutes ago, barabbas16 said:

Yeah... he doesn't exactly have a stellar record against Detroit in the playoffs, though.  I think Detroit went through Quenneville at least each year they won the Cup, plus 2009.... I didn't verify that, so it might not be completely accurate.

Your thinking of '09. In '08 they went through Nashville, Colorado, Dallas, and Pittsburgh. 2009 they faced Chicago in the 3rd round.

[xault 272]

Who cares, we play them what 2-3 times a year now? Post this in some CHI bandwagon forum where someone cares.

[DatsyukianDekes 2,428]

THE CORE

[kickazz 5,459]

He's trolling ya'll and ya'll taking the bait.

shocky2002 - 1

everyone else - 0

I'm going to start keeping score of how many times he bait wins on the forums. 

Edited March 13, 2017 by kickazz

[barabbas16 499]

1 hour ago, kliq said:

Your thinking of '09. In '08 they went through Nashville, Colorado, Dallas, and Pittsburgh. 2009 they faced Chicago in the 3rd round.

Ah, but Quenneville coached Colorado in 2008, right?

[kliq 3,755]

1 hour ago, barabbas16 said:

Ah, but Quenneville coached Colorado in 2008, right?

Oh ya he did. I have absolutely zero recollection of that lol.

[kickazz 5,459]

15 minutes ago, kliq said:

Oh ya he did. I have absolutely zero recollection of that lol.

We decimated them dude no one remembers much of that team. 

[frankgrimes 1,836]

They would have needed to be out of the playoff picture in order to be backja. Since they never were this is wrong

Edited March 13, 2017 by frankgrimes

[LeftWinger 4,948]

Quenville is not the best coach. He, along with the city and fans are the benefactors of The Bowmans. Without Stan and Scotty, no more than the 1 Cup. The only dynasty in Chicago is named Bowman. Yes, he put us over the top as well.

[kliq 3,755]

3 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

Quenville is not the best coach. He, along with the city and fans are the benefactors of The Bowmans. Without Stan and Scotty, no more than the 1 Cup. The only dynasty in Chicago is named Bowman. Yes, he put us over the top as well.

Stan Bowman gets way to much credit for Chicago. Sure he has a done a good job since he got there, but I'm pretty sure the acquisitions of Keith, Seabrook, Kane, and Toews were all Rick Dudley's work. Pretty good core he got to start with.

[kipwinger 8,518]

16 hours ago, barabbas16 said:

Yeah... he doesn't exactly have a stellar record against Detroit in the playoffs, though.  I think Detroit went through Quenneville at least each year they won the Cup, plus 2009.... I didn't verify that, so it might not be completely accurate.

When you say "Chicago" there, do you mean the organization, the fans, or both?  Because I would assume that Chicago fans are no less than thrilled to see the Red Wings down and out this year.

During our dynasty did anyone give a damn how bad Chicago and Toronto were?  Nada.  We had bigger fish to fry.  When you're winning you don't pay any attention to the losers.  And when you're losing, if LGW is any indication, you pay way TOO MUCH attention to how you used to win a lot 20 years ago.  GLOOOORYYYYY DAAAAAAYYYYSSSSS!

[shocky2002 36]

On 12/03/2017 at 0:57 PM, GMRwings1983 said:

I thought this thread was started in 2009.  Then I looked, and saw it was started today.

What are they back from?  They won the Cup two years ago and had a good chance of winning it last year, but ran into a motivated St Louis team that eked them out in a tough series.  

What am I missing here?

It seemed like they weren't really a top tier team for about 18 months. But now they are and it's time to sweat again.

[GMRwings1983 8,793]

On 3/12/2017 at 8:40 PM, DatsyukianDekes said:

THE CORE

I've tried to find that thread many times, but failed.  Maybe someone can help me with that.

There was a HUGE thread on LGW after the 2010 offseason talking about how the Blackhawks would crumble as they lost many key players from their first Cup team.  Sadly, as we all know, that did not happen.  

[puckbags 863]

On 3/14/2017 at 2:24 PM, shocky2002 said:

It seemed like they weren't really a top tier team for about 18 months. But now they are and it's time to sweat again.

Sweat why? Why do I or anyone else on this forum care who wins the cup? If the Wings don't win it I could care less.