Aethernum

And then a fluky penalty leads to the PK for goal number two. Whatever we say about Howard's mental stamina, if I were in his boots I'd be crumbling, too. I swear Howard must feel cursed right now.

The difference is that Rask has been Boston's #1 all year long, for a few years now. Not so for Mrazek in Detroit. And by all means, criticize away. I did earlier - it seems like he isn't focused. All I'm saying is I like what Blash is doing, trusting his #1 and showing the world that he IS the #1. Overthinking by a mile - isn't that what the coach gets paid to do? I trust Blash here. There's a reason he's in charge.

There's still time, yet! For Helm, D, and Z!

The thing is, if you put in Howard then suddenly the questions start again: Who is the Detroit goalie? Is this a timeshare? Is it a 1a, 1b situation or is Howard still the backup? I think Blashill is showing great poise and judgment in allowing his goalie to work through a bad day. He knows what the consequences would be of throwing the goalie situation back into doubt; instead, he's making a statement about who our #1 goalie is and that he has confidence in his ability to figure it out. I like it. It's a bold move. Was that Pasha's goal?

Four of Boston's five goals have come within 20 seconds of the start of a period or a Detroit goal. Is it a focus thing? Is he just not set and ready to go? Bad game for Mrazek, but the rest of the team playing hard. If we can pull this out, it's an opportunity to learn how to win with the offense, which this team needs to be able to do. Keep at it, boys!

Sorry, I wasn't trying to take a shot at GoWings or what he said about the lines. All I meant by that is shuffling the lines doesn't do anything if the execution isn't there. And better execution can make any line combo look good. I think reducing all our offensive success/failure to who is playing with whom is overly simplistic. HOW each player is playing matters more than who they are playing with.

We've outscored our opponents 8-1 since the most recent line mix-up. Why would anyone change what we've been doing?

If this were a Holland signing everyone would be up in arms saying how he screwed the pooch again, signing an aging D-man for too long a contract for too high a price.

Five goals later...it's almost as if the lines don't matter as much as the execution of the players on those lines...

If he's available at the right price? Sure. But the inherent problem with free agency is that if someone worthwhile were available at the right price, every other team in the league would come knocking. Someone is going to overpay for Byfuglien and I hope it isn't us.

Yeah, nothing to be done on that one by the goalie. That's on the captain, unfortunately, or on whoever lost the battle along the boards that led to that play. But the response has been good so far - lots of energy from both teams, it seems to me.

A brilliant, smart pass play by Smith, leading to a great hands deke by Helm for a goal. It's like this entire forum's reality just got de-constructed. Just need Jimmy to notch a good game and we'll have a buffet line for the crow. He's looking great so far.

Nobody on this team has any skill, or ability to shoot, or make dekes, or get to the net, so I hear. Until they do. Huge win. Incredible road trip.

And you know the moment that happens everyone who called for trading him in the first place will bemoan how stupid our GM is for trading a clear star goaltender.

It's incredible how you managed to get insider info on what Holland is and isn't doing on a regular basis...

This. A team can't be America's team if it doesn't play America's sport.

Even when you draft them, though, you have to pay them. Look at Chicago. The salary cap is the most significant thing to happen to the NHL since the implementation of the forward pass.

In a pre-salary cap era, sure. That wasn't hard to do back then.

Don't you know the rules? If you post even one negative comment in a Game Day Thread, you're contractually obligated to stick around and eat your crow if the team pulls out a win. Kidding, kidding...all I'm saying is that I wish for more positivity in this space. I don't understand the fan experience that reinforces negativity and doesn't allow for the joy of victory. A lot of posters in this forum seem to have this impression that it's somehow edgy and contrarian to come in here and post all about how bad the team is and how many changes they'd make if they were HC or GM, and give no thought to positivity when we win. As if they know better than the people who are paid millions of dollars to do nothing but run a hockey team. When the team wins, that mindset is challenged, and nobody sticks around to bear that challenge. I don't know if there's such a thing as "good" or "bad" fans, but I know that if good fans do exist, they're not perpetually mired in negativity and paralyzed by the fear of loss.

*Every time anyone scores on us*: WORST RED WINGS TEAM EVER! FIRE EVERYONE! *We win the game*: crickets...

Obviously the last few games have been frustrating to watch, but I'm not as convinced as the rest of this board that the lines are the problem here. Could the lines be improved? Sure. But paring everything Blashill does to merely putting numbers with numbers seems remarkably oversimplified to me. Whoever's on the ice needs to be making plays, and that comes from the system and the execution far more than it does the pairings. The coach isn't paid to put people with people; he's paid to install a system and ensure the highest possible execution therein. Blaming everything on who is playing with who just doesn't make sense in that context. Take Datsyuk, for example. Datsyuk with Helm makes sense to me. Helm's speed can open up the ice for D to make a play. But Datsyuk with Z also makes sense. So does Datsyuk with Larkin, or with Abby. But you can only pick two. so whoever ends up playing with Datsyuk, that group needs to come up with plays. It's not a question of finding some magical chemistry that can be a silver bullet to all of our problems. It's a question of avoiding simple errors - giveaways, missed passes, all the things that still seem to be plaguing this team - and playing the system with smarts and speed. Some of it breaks down to understanding the concept of consistency. We seem to have this notion on here, as fans, that players at the NHL level are immune to ups and downs in their game. Some people on the boards think Smith is a useless bonehead who does nothing but make stupid errors. Others note that he has been one of our best D-men in the last few weeks. I don't view those observations as exclusive of one another. Smith can be our best defenseman one night, and our worst the next. And that's not even a bad thing - that's now athletic competition works. Sometimes our scoring is going to come from the Top 6. When it doesn't, the third and fourth lines or the defense needs to contribute. Sometimes our goalie is going to post a shutout. When he doesn't, the offense needs to step it up. Teams with real depth don't rely on consistency to win games. They rely on knowing that someone, somewhere, is going to step up and make a play when they have to. And that person isn't always going to be the same every time. So to me, when this team struggles, it's not a question of shuffling our players around so that our best players on any given night are in the Top 6. For one thing, there's no way of knowing who will perform the best on any given night. And even if Blashill did know, we'd have to have a line swap every night to accommodate that type of system. When we struggle, it's usually because we fail at the basics - smart defensive play, turnovers, offsides, winning the faceoffs, etc. Those things don't improve just because you swap around some numbers on a white board. Am I saying I'm happy with the lines? I'm not sure. But I don't get paid to think about those things - Blashill does. And I'm not arrogant enough to think that I know better than one of the best minds in hockey. Every single NHL coach knows far more about these things than I do or anyone else on these boards does, so barging into the forums saying if only Blash would put X with Y or bump up so-and-so or demote that-one-guy everything would change...it just strikes me as childish and ill-informed. We can do better.

Maybe Jimmy should have had that. But someone has to get in the way. I could have gotten a decent shot on net with that much time. We have enough young guys out there tonight that keeping our feet moving shouldn't be a problem. Edit: And turnovers, turnovers, turnovers...

Just got in. How are we down 2-0 but outshooting them 2:1? And Z lost teeth?

Is it just me, or does it seem like every game where we outshoot the opponent, we lose, and vice-versa? Some quick research: Of the games where we outshot the opponent, we're 8-5-1 (61% of possible points earned). Of the games where the opponent outshot us, we're 8-5-6 (59% of possible points earned). With the season-opener against Toronto being even in shots and our other win. So I guess I'm wrong. But it still feels that way.

The Wheelhouse.