Post-Game Talk: Another blown 3 period lead

[ArGarBarGar]

That's a ridiculous comparison. Roy and Brodeur weren't carrying their teams. Both played on extremely deep teams for the bulk of their careers. Of course you need good goaltending but it isn't as if the Devils were getting out shot 20-40 every night and winning because of Brodeur. That's absurd. Same goes for the Avs.
The Wings this year have leaned way to hard on their goalies and stolen points even when the rest of the team got soundly outplayed. There is absolutely no comparison to the Devils or Avs of the 90s. The Hasek Sabres would be a better comparison and they never won a cup.

What's more absurd is one, that you think he was saying that, and two, that the Wings performance (particularly in the last 14 games) has been nearly comparable to getting outshot 20-40 every night.

The Wings over the last 14 game have on average outshot their opponents 32.7-30.2. They leaned hard on their goalies to start the season, but that hasn't really been the case lately.

 

[Frk It]

While it was intended to make you laugh I am not sure your assessment is entirely accurate. Goaltending has hidden a ton of weakness in the system and strategy of this team. They rank among the bottom 10 in most statistical categories and the PP is absolutely dreadful which is a hallmark of Blashill's tenure as an NHL assistant. Given this is the best roster they have had since Lidstrom retired these things do not reflect well on Blashill's performance as head coach. In 31 games they have coughed up a 3rd period lead 11 times. Inexcusable.

So good goaltending can't be contributed to coaching? Just the players that are underperforming?

 

[Actual Thought*]

We value all viewpoints here. Basically because one viewpoint would be terribly boring.

But people need to remember this is supposed to be about hockey, not people. It seems from my experience that a handful of people quickly become all of "HF Boards".

To be fair that is because a handful of people dominate the rhetoric and steer the discourse in the direction of their personal opinions. For example it is why the board is largely anti-Holland. If you don't recognize that it is probably because you are part of the group dominating the rhetoric.

What's more absurd is one, that you think he was saying that, and two, that the Wings performance (particularly in the last 14 games) has been nearly comparable to getting outshot 20-40 every night.

The Wings over the last 14 game have on average outshot their opponents 32.7-30.2. They leaned hard on their goalies to start the season, but that hasn't really been the case lately.

I would agree with that. That is why just the other day I directed some complimentary comments Blashill's way. However they have a long way to go and he needs to be better yet if they are to maximize their ability. Their inability to close games is a huge problem.

So good goaltending can't be contributed to coaching? Just the players that are underperforming?

I never said that.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

I would disagree that the Wings have a ton of untapped potential to be had. I think if anything the players themselves are the reason that potential hasn't been realized. Especially considering this personnel spent a lot of its best years (Kronwall, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Ericsson, Smith, Kindl, among others) playing for a future HoF coach and as a team has done diddly since 2009.

 

[Pavels Dog]

I would disagree that the Wings have a ton of untapped potential to be had.

There's quite a bit of untapped potential on the team. Unless you think Datsyuk has suddenly turned into a 0.5PPG player that shoots at half his usual %, and that Sheahan has regressed into a 15-20 point player and Helm will keep missing 2-3 breakaways per game. Of course if they heat up, others like Abby and Larkin could slow down and balance it out. But generally when you look at a team and almost no one is on track for a career year and almost no one is shooting at their usual %, there is untapped potential.

 

[Heaton]

Unless you think Datsyuk has suddenly turned into a 0.5PPG player that shoots at half his usual %

Olders fall off the map rapidly, I wouldn't be surprised if Datsyuk struggles to produce this year.

that Sheahan has regressed into a 15-20 point player

Probably not in this case, but he'll need to start producing soon because he sucks right now. 6 points and it's almost January? That's a joke.

and Helm will keep missing 2-3 breakaways per game

That fact that we're even talking on counting on Helm to produce offensively shows how bad offensively we are.

Of course if they heat up, others like Abby and Larkin could slow down and balance it out. But generally when you look at a team and almost no one is on track for a career year and almost no one is shooting at their usual %, there is untapped potential.

I don't really call that potential, potential means that a player will exceed their current 'best' abilities (at least that's what it means to me). Players playing ****** and finally playing like they should is playing up to their abilities, nothing more.

 

[Actual Thought*]

I would disagree that the Wings have a ton of untapped potential to be had. I think if anything the players themselves are the reason that potential hasn't been realized. Especially considering this personnel spent a lot of its best years (Kronwall, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Ericsson, Smith, Kindl, among others) playing for a future HoF coach and as a team has done diddly since 2009.

So basically you are saying Mrazek, Howard, Larkin, Green, Richards, Nyquist, Tatar, Dekeyser, Abby, Pulks, Quincey, Glendenning, Sheahan and Marchenko among others are complete non factors while you include depth players who are often healthy scratches in your list of factors?

Olders fall off the map rapidly, I wouldn't be surprised if Datsyuk struggles to produce this year.



Probably not in this case, but he'll need to start producing soon because he sucks right now. 6 points and it's almost January? That's a joke.



That fact that we're even talking on counting on Helm to produce offensively shows how bad offensively we are.



I don't really call that potential, potential means that a player will exceed their current 'best' abilities (at least that's what it means to me). Players playing ****** and finally playing like they should is playing up to their abilities, nothing more.

Playing up to your abilities is by definition realizing your potential.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

So basically you are saying Mrazek, Howard, Larkin, Green, Richards, Nyquist, Tatar, Dekeyser, Abby, Pulks, Quincey, Glendenning, Sheahan and Marchenko among others are complete non factors while you include depth players who are often healthy scratches in your list of factors?

Howard is not going to get any better. Mrazek, yes. But we have won games because of him lately, and you think that is a coaching problem. Green has been a positive on a brutal defensive unit, yes. That has been noticable. Richards is not a very good player, so his addition was really only to give us a bit more depth while Datsyuk was injured. Nyquist, Tatar, and Dekeyser are not nearly at the same level as the players I mentioned who have been the cornerstones of the franchise. Abby has done well so far, but is complimentary. Pulkkinen has been okay. Quincey has been okay. Glendening has been bad this year. Sheahan has been bad this year. Marchenko has been steady but not a difference maker.

I was simply pointing out a lot of the core of the team (and those players who were considered some of the best at their position) has gotten older and noticeably worse and that is going to play a factor.

Nobody that you mentioned is in the same tier. Larkin might be, and Tatar/Nyquist/Dekeyser may be at a tier just below, but you underestimate the value of star power that plays like it. Ericsson has gotten progressively worse. Smith has not been nearly what people were expecting. Kindl hasn't gotten any better either. Great coaching or not, that happens a lot.

 

[Mount Suribachi]

So, you're just allowed to discuss - and necessarily criticize - it, if you aren't coming into the game with a 13 games pts streak? Doesn't it bother you
guys to blow just another 3rd period lead at home? Standing here, being critical of some aspects doesn't mean that one isn't grateful for the points before.
It's more of a criticism on making less out of our opportunities than we're capable of.

Of course criticism is valid, but it also has to be grounded in reality and not a massive over-reaction. Points in 13 straight games, then lose one game by a goal (where we hit the post twice and miss a wide open net in the last minute) and suddenly the team that just lost is the "real" Wings team - everyone and everything suck, everyone should be fired, everyone should be traded, blow the whole thing up etc etc.

Could the power play be better? Sure. Are there other good teams with a bad PP? Sure. Have teams won the Stanley Cup with a bad power play? Sure. Of course, in the beautiful world of the chicken licken Wings fan, having a good PP is also a source of criticism (see: Last Season). Because if you're winning games because of your PP, that's a bad thing because it means you're not winning them 5on5 and everyone knows that there are less PP's in the playoffs, therefore you'll lose in the playoffs. But have a bad PP? Well, everyone knows there are less PP's in the playoffs, so its even more important that you can score on the few opportunities that you do get......see how it works? Now do the same with good vs bad goaltending

That's a ridiculous comparison. Roy and Brodeur weren't carrying their teams. Both played on extremely deep teams for the bulk of their careers. Of course you need good goaltending but it isn't as if the Devils were getting out shot 20-40 every night and winning because of Brodeur. That's absurd. Same goes for the Avs.
The Wings this year have leaned way to hard on their goalies and stolen points even when the rest of the team got soundly outplayed. There is absolutely no comparison to the Devils or Avs of the 90s. The Hasek Sabres would be a better comparison and they never won a cup.

Comparing us to the Hasek Sabres is equally ridiculous. They were a below average team that got badly outshot every night and relied upon some of the greatest goaltending of all time to win. We on the other hand stole 2 or 3 games back in October through the play of Mrazek and Howard, and er, that's it.

 

[Winger98]

Gator, Nyquist, Larkin, and Tatar are on pace for 25-30 goals a piece this year, not sure how much more productive you expect any of those guys to be. Pulkkinen was on pace for, what, 25 goals? Mrazek and Howard are arguably the best goalie tandem in the league. Green's been clicking along at a .55 ppg since coming back from injury, which isn't far from his career average. Richards might have some ceiling left, but the guys' 35, continuing to fall off at this point in his career shoudn't be a huge surprise.

I'm not sure where there's a big amount of room for these guys to give a lot more.

 

[WingedWheel1987]

Buffalo Sabres had the #2 ranked defense the year they went to the Cup Finals. Their offense was ranked 17th. There were 27 teams that season, so their offense was bad, but their defense more than made up for their inability to score goals.

 

[Winger98]

Give us a prime Hasek and I like our chances of going on a playoff run, too. Probably wouldn't hurt our gaa, either.

 

[obey86]

Of course criticism is valid, but it also has to be grounded in reality and not a massive over-reaction. Points in 13 straight games, then lose one game by a goal (where we hit the post twice and miss a wide open net in the last minute) and suddenly the team that just lost is the "real" Wings team - everyone and everything suck, everyone should be fired, everyone should be traded, blow the whole thing up etc etc.

Could the power play be better? Sure. Are there other good teams with a bad PP? Sure. Have teams won the Stanley Cup with a bad power play? Sure. Of course, in the beautiful world of the chicken licken Wings fan, having a good PP is also a source of criticism (see: Last Season). Because if you're winning games because of your PP, that's a bad thing because it means you're not winning them 5on5 and everyone knows that there are less PP's in the playoffs, therefore you'll lose in the playoffs. But have a bad PP? Well, everyone knows there are less PP's in the playoffs, so its even more important that you can score on the few opportunities that you do get......see how it works? Now do the same with good vs bad goaltending



Comparing us to the Hasek Sabres is equally ridiculous. They were a below average team that got badly outshot every night and relied upon some of the greatest goaltending of all time to win. We on the other hand stole 2 or 3 games back in October through the play of Mrazek and Howard, and er, that's it.

lol, so true.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

Maybe if the Wings could score more goals, Losing in the 3rd period wouldn't be happening so after being up 1-0 with about 4 minutes left in the game what do you expect if we score 2 goals then most likely this isn't an issue.

 

[WingedWheel1987]

People didn't criticize the Wings for having a good PP. They criticized the Wings for being overly reliant on it. It's a recipe for disaster in the playoffs.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

He does?

Howard is not going to get any better. Mrazek, yes. But we have won games because of him lately, and you think that is a coaching problem. Green has been a positive on a brutal defensive unit, yes. That has been noticable. Richards is not a very good player, so his addition was really only to give us a bit more depth while Datsyuk was injured. Nyquist, Tatar, and Dekeyser are not nearly at the same level as the players I mentioned who have been the cornerstones of the franchise. Abby has done well so far, but is complimentary. Pulkkinen has been okay. Quincey has been okay. Glendening has been bad this year. Sheahan has been bad this year. Marchenko has been steady but not a difference maker.

I was simply pointing out a lot of the core of the team (and those players who were considered some of the best at their position) has gotten older and noticeably worse and that is going to play a factor.

Nobody that you mentioned is in the same tier. Larkin might be, and Tatar/Nyquist/Dekeyser may be at a tier just below, but you underestimate the value of star power that plays like it. Ericsson has gotten progressively worse. Smith has not been nearly what people were expecting. Kindl hasn't gotten any better either. Great coaching or not, that happens a lot.

Richards is not a bad player at all... Is he what he once was? No, of course he is not. But he isn't only here for the Datsyuk injury period, Brad Richards has been a very good playoff player for a really long time including runs to the last two Stanley Cup finals. He is a solid player that doesn't produce nearly as much anymore in the regular season but does play hard and right every night while generating chances. But what makes him attractive is he is a good playoff guy and I fully believe that will bear out again.

Richards is a post-season acquisition and quite frankly he has played just fine since he came back. People are a little too caught up in just the numbers. He is playing well actually skates better than I thought he would and he will be a factor at the time of year we really need him to be. Really solid pickup, extremely happy he is on the team.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Buffalo Sabres had the #2 ranked defense the year they went to the Cup Finals. Their offense was ranked 17th. There were 27 teams that season, so their offense was bad, but their defense more than made up for their inability to score goals.

but what is that based on? Goals allowed the entire season? Thats all Hasek then.

 

[Classicnamesup]

I'm not a mathemagician but GA is usually based on goals against

 

[SpookyTsuki]

I'm not a mathemagician but GA is usually based on goals against

If your talking about me, I know that. Just trying to figure out how the Sabres had #2 dfence in 99

 

[Actual Thought*]

Comparing us to the Hasek Sabres is equally ridiculous. They were a below average team that got badly outshot every night and relied upon some of the greatest goaltending of all time to win. We on the other hand stole 2 or 3 games back in October through the play of Mrazek and Howard, and er, that's it.

I think the # is far greater than that. This team played like one of the worst in the league for the first 20 games or so.

 

[HockeyinHD]

"27-29 goal scorers" just doesn't have the same ring to it. That's what they've done, that's what they're on pace to do.

Tatar is top 15 among LW in goals, Nyquist is top 10 among RWs in goals. There are exactly 15 wingers total with more goals than the two of them this season, and exactly 24 forwards total. And both were top 30 among forwards in goals last season.

Tatar was t-16th, Nyquist was t-27th with 6 other guys. I guess he's technically in the top 30, as long as we allow that the top 30 had 33 guys in it last year.

My point here is that at least Nyquist and quite possibly Tatar as well are perceived to be rather better and more impactful than they are. This doesn't mean they are bad, obviously, just that they're more satellite pieces than building block pieces.

They're fine.

We're talking about two players that are putting up numbers that indicate they're among the best wingers in the NHL. ESPECIALLY if you take their TOI into account, since they're not really playing top 6 minutes. Tatar for example is 16th in the league in G/60 (forwards with more than 20GP). Almost all players ahead of him in that category are considered elite players, or are having crazy years (Lindberg, Hoffman etc).

Neither of them play the PK, so that tends to skew G/60-type numbers, right? I mean, Holmstrom had fairly insane G/60 or P/60 numbers his whole career, for similar reasons.

Our goaltending has been mediocre lately. Mrazeks has been under .900 in 3 of his last 6 starts, Howard under .900 in 3 of his last 7.

Well, to be fair, in those games he was over .900 he wasn't under .920... and you gerrymandered a .946, .926 and 38 save SO out of consideration, as well.

Same general deal with Howard, although a little less pronounced.

IMO Mrazek in particular has been terrific this year, as well as lately. He's had a couple stinkers to be sure, but I'd call the netminding inconsistent before I'd call it mediocre, even lately.