Post-Game Talk: great game

[TheOtherOne]

This game is literally proof that the NHL needs to get rid of the shootout. Toronto should have lost 8-0 and end up winning getting 2 points towards a playoff spot because they were better at breakaways.

Detroit seriously needs to consider putting Mrazek in net for shootouts. It could honestly cost us a division title or home ice advantage losing all these shootouts

Meh. If the game went to 7ot and a lucky bounce got past Jimmy you could say the same thing. If the game ended in a tie we'd get 1 point each and you could say the same thing. It's just a once in a lifetime outcome of a one sided game. I don't think the existence of the shootout had much to do with that.

Is it fair to say hockey fans are "over" the shootout yet?

The Wings and Howard suck at them now, no doubt, but I can't even bother to care about it.

As a Wings fan I hate the ****ing shootout for obvious reasons.

As a hockey fan who tries to put his homer bias aside, I think the shootout is a good compromise because I have always hated ties and don't want regular season games to go on for 5 hours. If we won 50% of them or even 40% of them I wouldn't give them a second thought.

The only things I'd be willing to do with the current system are:
A) Make regulation wins worth 3 points
and/or
B) Add a 3v3 period before the shootout.

Other than that I think it's completely fine.

 

[SirloinUB]

I honestly don't know if Howard has made a single save in the shootout this season.

He has made 3 saves on 10 shots. The crazy thing is, Howard was elite in the shootout a couple of years ago.

In 10/11 and 11/12 he posted .882 and .815 Sv %, good for 10th and 5th in the league respectively. Obviously luck is a huge factor but his Psyche has to be damaged at this point.

 

[Flowah]

I'd be fine with games going 5 hours. Advertisers and media companies are not. I understand the reason for the compromise and I'm reasonably happy with it. I can't get everything I want. What I'd want is playoff style 5 on 5 overtimes until the game ends but obviously we can't do that for 9-10 months of the year every other day when there's a game on

 

[Cursed Lemon]

Julie the Cat did it.

Problem is that the Leafs aren't fancy and won't go glove.

 

[HisNoodliness]

Meh. If the game went to 7ot and a lucky bounce got past Jimmy you could say the same thing. If the game ended in a tie we'd get 1 point each and you could say the same thing. It's just a once in a lifetime outcome of a one sided game. I don't think the existence of the shootout had much to do with that.



As a Wings fan I hate the ****ing shootout for obvious reasons.

As a hockey fan who tries to put his homer bias aside, I think the shootout is a good compromise because I have always hated ties and don't want regular season games to go on for 5 hours. If we won 50% of them or even 40% of them I wouldn't give them a second thought.

The only things I'd be willing to do with the current system are:
A) Make regulation wins worth 3 points
and/or
B) Add a 3v3 period before the shootout.

Other than that I think it's completely fine.

I like the idea of 3v3 before the shootout or anything else to prevent the shootout, but I disagree that the current system is fine. The problem with the shootout is in general (ignoring the Wings ) teams are 50/50 in the shootout. You can dominate the whole game, but when the shootout comes around, you're just as likely to win, or in the Wings case less likely to win, than your opponent. If there were more overtimes, or it was 3v3, or something that resembled hockey, the better team would still be more likely to win. They might as well decide it with a coin toss, or just make it a tie because now there are tons of undeserved points floating around. Winning a hockey game and getting lucky in the shootout should never be considered similar things, let alone rewarded in the same way.

 

[SirloinUB]

It's the biggest issue. He is holding us back.

Can't be worse. You guys can make excuses for this guy all you want he isn't the answer and he will never win a Stanley cup as a starting goalie.

He doesn't pass the eye test. His stats are better than Jonathan Quick too is he better? He doesn't have the "it" factor. Love him all you want he is an average goalie. With this team we need better than that.

Hey Everybody,

Our goalie who is 5th in GAA, 8th in wins and 9th in sv%, is holding this team back...

10/10 those kind of numbers pass my eye test.

 

[opivy]

Hey Everybody,

Our goalie who is 5th in GAA, 8th in wins and 9th in sv%, is holding this team back...

10/10 those kind of numbers pass my eye test.

Agreed.

He keeps us in every game, it's very very rare where he lays a stinker and we lost because of him.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

I'd be fine with games going 5 hours. Advertisers and media companies are not. I understand the reason for the compromise and I'm reasonably happy with it. I can't get everything I want. What I'd want is playoff style 5 on 5 overtimes until the game ends but obviously we can't do that for 9-10 months of the year every other day when there's a game on

I think if there were fewer games (say 40 or so as an extreme) then we could justify it.

I always wondered why the NHL went to 82 games. The NFL has 16 and is the most physically grueling sport in the big-four. The NBA has 82 because it takes a lot of stamina but it isn't nearly as demanding as football and hockey. The MLB has 162 because it's baseball. Hockey probably shouldn't have 82 games if we want to see the players at their best the maximum amount of time.

 

[Pavels Dog]

I know I am, but...

Whether we like it or not, the shootout is part of the game, and teams ignore it at their own peril. And, we seem to be ignoring it.

Successful teams in the shootout have star players that do well (Datsyuk), but you also need a "shootout specialist" (Jussi Jokinen, TJ Oshie, Brad Boyes type of player). Aside from Big Bert and his spin-o-rama, we've never had one.

I think Babcock should identify someone and focus them on the shootout. This won't directly fix Howard's "issues", but if we score more often in the shootout, it might not matter as much.

I don't think Babcock cares much. If we were right in the middle of the wildcard battle and we were losing games in the SO, maybe he would devote more time to SO practice. As it stands? We are #1 with a 1-4 SO record. What does that say? That we are a very good team in Regulation/Overtime. That is what matters.

Keep getting those ROW and collecting loser points from the SO and we will sit in a nice spot come playoff time.

 

[TheOtherOne]

I like the idea of 3v3 before the shootout or anything else to prevent the shootout, but I disagree that the current system is fine. The problem with the shootout is in general (ignoring the Wings ) teams are 50/50 in the shootout. You can dominate the whole game, but when the shootout comes around, you're just as likely to win, or in the Wings case less likely to win, than your opponent. If there were more overtimes, or it was 3v3, or something that resembled hockey, the better team would still be more likely to win. They might as well decide it with a coin toss, or just make it a tie because now there are tons of undeserved points floating around. Winning a hockey game and getting lucky in the shootout should never be considered similar things, let alone rewarded in the same way.

Think of it this way. If you get to 65 min and you're still tied, nobody is dominating anybody. This of course has exceptions, which we have seen quite recently... but in general it is true. If one team is a clear cut winner, they would have won by that point. Otherwise, the game is considered even enough that a single lucky bounce or bad call will decide a winner, one way or the other.

Think of the shootout as being that one lucky bounce.

Remind yourself that even if the Wings dominated the Leafs for 5 hours last night, with Reimer somehow pulling off 200 more miracles, STILL some freak incident can occur putting the puck in our net and solidifying the Leafs as the winner.

The shootout is just expediting that.

 

[InjuredChoker]

I think if there were fewer games (say 40 or so as an extreme) then we could justify it.

I always wondered why the NHL went to 82 games. The NFL has 16 and is the most physically grueling sport in the big-four. The NBA has 82 because it takes a lot of stamina but it isn't nearly as demanding as football and hockey. The MLB has 162 because it's baseball. Hockey probably shouldn't have 82 games if we want to see the players at their best the maximum amount of time.

$$$$$$$$$$.

that's why.

 

[Flowah]

I think if there were fewer games (say 40 or so as an extreme) then we could justify it.

I always wondered why the NHL went to 82 games. The NFL has 16 and is the most physically grueling sport in the big-four. The NBA has 82 because it takes a lot of stamina but it isn't nearly as demanding as football and hockey. The MLB has 162 because it's baseball. Hockey probably shouldn't have 82 games if we want to see the players at their best the maximum amount of time.

Don't you dare suggest we reduce the number of games. I can barely survive the 2-3 months of summer. Every other sport sucks.

 

[Classicnamesup]

Obviously the loss isn't on Howard but he is so laughably terrible at shootouts it will likely cost us 10 points or more by the end of the year. Something must be done, that is a playoff berth for 90% of the league

 

[ArGarBarGar]

Don't you dare suggest we reduce the number of games. I can barely survive the 2-3 months of summer. Every other sport sucks.

I'm not suggesting it, I'm just saying that's the only way it is feasible to have continuous overtime.

 

[8snake]

Hank goes through stretches every year when he looks like he's skating in mud...sometimes it's been his back, sometimes it may just have been fatigue...but when he looks like this it's frustrating to watch because he's 4-5 steps behind the play and really ineffective offensively. He'll get his legs back at some point as he usually does, but he's never been a good skater to begin with. When his skating is THIS bad though it's really hard for him to make things happen.

 

[14ari13]

He had a good look on that pass, but still looked slow and a step behind most of the night.


The Leafs scored 1 goal. Come on, let's not get into the "coulda shoulda woulda" territory.


I don't think lack of shots were an issue tonight. He stopped what, 18 shots out of 19? He was fine in regulation and overtime, but just could not make a save in the shootout. I'm willing to give him some slack since we never seem to score in the shootout, either, but he has to have one shootout where he gives the Wings a chance to win even if they don't score more than 1 goal. He's gotta do it at least once if the offense isn't there.



Hellz yeah.

Nevertheless he still created the lone goal.

We have to make sure we do not outplay opponents, but give up good scoring chances and make their goalie look great.

Lol are you kidding? Yea and the wings scored 40 goals if not for the ones that were stopped. That's hockey.

Shots vs good scoring chances.

 

[Stuck in Socal]

I'm not worried about Z.

Like others have said, he set up the goal last night with a great pass to Jurco.

I don't think this team needs a RH Puck moving D like most people want. On the contrary, I think a stay at home Dman is what this team needs moving forward. Someone who can play top line minutes with Kronwall, because Big E is not cutting it right now.

I will be sold on the status of this team after January/February. If they are still near the top of the conference after the brutal schedule, then I will believe that they can make some noise come playoff time.

 

[Brandel*]

Nevertheless he still created the lone goal.

We have to make sure we do not outplay opponents, but give up good scoring chances and make their goalie look great.



Shots vs good scoring chances.

pretty sure the wings dominated scoring chances as well

 

[HisNoodliness]

I think if there were fewer games (say 40 or so as an extreme) then we could justify it.

I always wondered why the NHL went to 82 games. The NFL has 16 and is the most physically grueling sport in the big-four. The NBA has 82 because it takes a lot of stamina but it isn't nearly as demanding as football and hockey. The MLB has 162 because it's baseball. Hockey probably shouldn't have 82 games if we want to see the players at their best the maximum amount of time.

NFL... most physically grueling? The NFL has almost no play. An average NFL game has 11 minutes of play. There are at most 20 games played in a season if you win the championship and don't have a bye... which happens to at most two teams. Assuming a player plays half a game (I'll round up to 6 minutes), they're playing for at most two hours total a year! There is no way that those two hours are more grueling than the 82 game plus, 10-25 minute games a hockey player plays.

Let's assume a player plays a 70 game season plus ten playoff games and plays 15 minutes a night, which is far from the maximum, but seems like a decent average, he's playing ten times what the most overworked football player plays.

If Ryan Suter were to win the cup, going 7 every round, and playing a full season while sticking to his 30 minutes a game. He would have 55 hours of play in a year. 3300 minutes. That's almost 30 times his equivalent football player.

Now obviously I've ignored difficulty of play/force involved, but that is more subjective and varies much more player to player, etc. and I'd say a linebacker in football certainly experiences more force in his six minutes of play than anyone does in six minutes of hockey. But a QB doesn't in his six minutes. Besides linebackers (both offensive and defensive) full backs and running backs, no football player has an equivalent six minutes to six minutes of hockey IMO. And I don't think their six minutes is harder than an hour of hockey regardless of the position.

Once again that list bit is all personal experience and estimation. It's very subjective, but in every objective form hockey is much more grueling than football. If the NHL season was shortened to say forty games, it's still the more grueling. Just halve all of my numbers.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

Now obviously I've ignored difficulty of play/force involved, but that is more subjective and varies much more player to player, etc. and I'd say a linebacker in football certainly experiences more force in his six minutes of play than anyone does in six minutes of hockey. But a QB doesn't in his six minutes. Besides linebackers (both offensive and defensive) full backs and running backs, no football player has an equivalent six minutes to six minutes of hockey IMO. And I don't think their six minutes is harder than an hour of hockey regardless of the position.

Once again that list bit is all personal experience and estimation. It's very subjective, but in every objective form hockey is much more grueling than football. If the NHL season was shortened to say forty games, it's still the more grueling. Just halve all of my numbers.

The bolded is important, and illustrates why the NFL is so much more demanding. If the NFL could afford to make the season longer in terms of player fatigue, they would. They aren't in the interest of losing out on free money.

 

[Actual Thought*]

I think if there were fewer games (say 40 or so as an extreme) then we could justify it.

I always wondered why the NHL went to 82 games. The NFL has 16 and is the most physically grueling sport in the big-four. The NBA has 82 because it takes a lot of stamina but it isn't nearly as demanding as football and hockey. The MLB has 162 because it's baseball. Hockey probably shouldn't have 82 games if we want to see the players at their best the maximum amount of time.

I think games like this make the case for the long season. Over a small sample size hockey is capable of providing some very skewed results. Over an 82 game season the true cream usually rises to the top.
Baseball is much more grueling than people think. Those guys stand around with cold muscles and then run their hardest. Cold muscles lead to injuries. They play almost every single day so they have very little time to heal. They also get dinged with the ball a lot. Foul tips into the ankles and shins and constant.

 

[DeYarmond Edison]

A "which sport is more physically demanding" debate?
It's football.. 100% of the time AINEC

There's a REASON they only play 16.

 

[InjuredChoker]

Detroit Red WingsVerified account
‏@DetroitRedWings
Petr's dialed in and ready to go for our @flagstar Twitterview! Tweet us your questions using #AskMrazek

second question

Greg ‏@gg72727 20s20 seconds ago
@DetroitRedWings @flagstar how are you on shootouts?

 

[ArGarBarGar]

second question

That's a beaut.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

I think games like this make the case for the long season. Over a small sample size hockey is capable of providing some very skewed results. Over an 82 game season the true cream usually rises to the top.
Baseball is much more grueling than people think. Those guys stand around with cold muscles and then run their hardest. Cold muscles lead to injuries. They play almost every single day so they have very little time to heal. They also get dinged with the ball a lot. Foul tips into the ankles and shins and constant.

I've played baseball, and it doesn't compare to the other three in my opinion.

Not saying it isn't grueling. Just not as much as the others, which is why they play so often.