Wings Round 1 Grade

[Yemack 1]

Good lord did u even ******* watch the series?

Mccarty Helm and Hudler should both gets MUCH HIGHER as they did far more than what was exected of them.

Filpulla should get a C. One clutch goal. Val was the bobby lang of this years series, invisible excecpt for countless missed chances created by other players and one good goal.

Lidstrom didnt play as well as expected, yes he was still very good, but overall not a very strong showing by his standards.

Zetterberg lack of totals due to inexperiance? for god sakes hes not a year or two into the leauge anymore. Zetterberg needs more of a finsih and more willingness to use the wrister. I think hes playing with a hurt wrist

'No I didn't watch the f*cking series what the f*ck do you think?'

doesn't sound so nice huh? next time why don't you try to write without F words?

As for Osgood, I think everyone will agree he played well and was playing on top of his level. However, he really didn't have to steal a game for us.

I know know 'he was solid and kept our team etc' Yes he was good but every goalie is good in playoff. (except few) If the grades were made based on expectation - perfomance, I would give Ozzie solid A to A+. If Ozzie puts on Ellis like peformance, I would give him A+ (which means Red Wings are in big trouble) Also having only played 2 game also did factor into his grading.

The grades are just my opinion, so please don't take it personal.

Edited April 22, 2008 by Yemack

[Donaldjr2448 43]

Well.... Since this is a team sport, I will grade each game:

Game 1-B- (82%) Great D. No O!!

Game 2- B+(88%) Better D, Better O!!!

Game 3- D+ Spent way too much time in Nashville Offensive Zone, didn't feel we controlled the game (68%)

Game 4- C+ Much better all around, probably should have won the game if not for pucks not hitting Dom in the first!! (78%)

Game 5- A- Best game of the series I though, we dominated the play forced Ellis to make great saves, Can't ask for anything more. (92%)

Game 6- A+again controlled the game from start to finish, Didn't give Nashville a chance to breathe. LOVE IT!! (98%)

Overall Grade: B (84%) Not too bad, but we need to find the back of the net. Colrado and Calgary are much better defensivly,and we will not see the chances we did in this series against either one of them!!

[Yemack 1]

Yeah. Hudlers points came from the PP. WHERE NO ONE ELSE COULD SCORE.

Call me a little conservitive person but until he proves that wasn't a fluke performance, he will get no benefit of doubt from me.

I didn't make the list like 'hm... he got 5 pts, yep thats an A'. I was trying to grade people based on their impression from my memory. Maybe I was wearing anti-Huds glass or went to bathroom everytime Huds was on the ice but Huds didn't put on a great showing the way I remember.

[C-TownWing 0]

'No I didn't watch the f*cking series what the f*ck do you think?'

doesn't sound so nice huh? next time why don't you try to write without F words?

As for Osgood, I think everyone will agree he played well and was playing on top of his level. However, he really didn't have to steal a game for us.

I know know 'he was solid and kept our team etc' Yes he was good but every goalie is good in playoff. (except few) If the grades were made based on expectation - perfomance, I would give Ozzie solid A to A+. If Ozzie puts on Ellis like peformance, I would give him A+ (which means Red Wings are in big trouble) Also having only played 2 game also did factor into his grading.

The grades are just my opinion, so please don't take it personal.

Valid point, although I have a hard time blaming Ozzie for the number of shots faced (or not faced). It's almost like blaming Hudler for doing all his scoring on the man advantage. Oh wait...

To me, goals are goals and shutouts are shutouts, whether you face 20 shots or 40. And while it wasn't an entire game, I'll give him credit for the 1st period of game 6--he bailed us out when the game was obviously very much in doubt.

[OsGOD 3]

As for Osgood, I think everyone will agree he played well and was playing on top of his level. However, he really didn't have to steal a game for us.

So in order to get an A you have to steal a game... yet Dom got only a D... (no minus)

Idk...the last game he was pretty lights out hockey.... dare i say perfect. I mean know that 54 seconds of 5-3 was nothing to kill off and all... but geez

Edited April 22, 2008 by OsGOD

[eva unit zero 271]

'No I didn't watch the f*cking series what the f*ck do you think?'

doesn't sound so nice huh? next time why don't you try to write without F words?

As for Osgood, I think everyone will agree he played well and was playing on top of his level. However, he really didn't have to steal a game for us.

I know know 'he was solid and kept our team etc' Yes he was good but every goalie is good in playoff. (except few) If the grades were made based on expectation - perfomance, I would give Ozzie solid A to A+. If Ozzie puts on Ellis like peformance or Kipper like performance, I would give him A+ (which means Red Wings will be in deep trouble) Also having only played 2 game also did factor into his grading.

The grades are just my opinion, so please don't take it personal.

Ozzie outperformed Kiprusoff and Ellis. He allowed 1 goal on 54 shots over more than 2 1/2 games. That's a better GAA and better save percentage than Ellis or Kiprusoff. The only goal Osgood allowed was of the 'unstoppable' variety, while Kipper and Ellis both allowed some stinkers.

Ozzie carried a 1-0 lead into the third period in both of his starts.

Of further notice...this series lasted 362 minutes, 154 of which were played by Osgood and 206 by Hasek. The Wings scored 6 goals and gave up 1 with Ozzie in net, compared to 11 and 10 with Hasek in net, or 11 and 17 for the Preds with Ellis in his 357 minutes.

Basically, it works out like this:

Osgood received 2.34 goals per 60 minutes in support, and won by 1.95 goals per 60 minutes.

Hasek received 3.20 goals per 60 minutes in support, and won by 0.29.

Ellis received 1.85 goals per 60 minutes in support, and lost by 1.01.

Osgood would have won with the goal support of Ellis or Hasek. Ellis would have won with Hasek's support, but not Osgood's. Hasek would not have won with Osgood's or Ellis' support.

Basically, Osgood played well enough to win even though the team wasn't scoring. By comparison, Anaheim lost their series and scored 2.17 goals per game, not far below what the Wings scored with Osgood in net.

[Yemack 1]

Valid point, although I have a hard time blaming Ozzie for the number of shots faced (or not faced). It's almost like blaming Hudler for doing all his scoring on the man advantage. Oh wait...

To me, goals are goals and shutouts are shutouts, whether you face 20 shots or 40. And while it wasn't an entire game, I'll give him credit for the 1st period of game 6--he bailed us out when the game was obviously very much in doubt.

I would appreciate if people stop trying to take a shot at me and talk about the subject. I didn't make the list to say 'hey I'm right and only I'm right.'

I really don't have to defend my opinion. Like I said in OP, I wanted to share my idea and was asking for your thoughts and assessment of round 1. If I ask what's everyone favourite fruit and I say mine is apple, I don't have to listen how orange is better BS. Get my drift? I understand some people here are incredibly sensitive type so maybe I asked for a fire when I opened this thread but jesus, let's hear your assessment rather than hear you bitching about my grade.

[Frozen-Man 144]

Hudler deserves an A- (B+ at the very least), he tied Dats and Kronvall as team leader in points with 5 (2 goals/3 assists) and they both got A or A- grades.

I thought Zets was good as well A-, 4 points (2 goals/2 assists) and team leader in plus/minus at +4

Drapes was a monster on the faceoff winning 63.3% which is huge but the team worst plus/minus of -3 brought him to a B.

I thought Ozzy was great coming in as he did and allowing just 1 goal in 8 periods and 54 total shots for a save percentage of 98.8% and goals against average of 0.38 (I know he just played 2 1/2 games but he shut out one and closed out the series for us) and that deserves an A+ to me.

Lids was who he always is and gets his regular A+ (ho hum just another day at the office).

I thought Drake was great with his intensity and hitting and overall game and deserved a solid B/

Franzen was great and was clutch when it really mattered (although I still wish he would use his size a little more) A-.

I thought McCarty was great and according to Babs after the Preds tied game 5 when he came into the dressing room between periods and asked if they had it under control McCarty told him they had already taken care of it and were ready to go. Great leadership and excitement to be back in the game. B+

Chels just for playing the most playoff games ever gets an A from me.

[Frozen-Man 144]

How is letting in one goal in over 157mins of hockey an A-

I would hate to have you as a teacher

HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa

Thats what I was thinking! Ozzy was incredible this series.

[Frozen-Man 144]

Ozzie outperformed Kiprusoff and Ellis. He allowed 1 goal on 54 shots over more than 2 1/2 games. That's a better GAA and better save percentage than Ellis or Kiprusoff. The only goal Osgood allowed was of the 'unstoppable' variety, while Kipper and Ellis both allowed some stinkers.

Ozzie carried a 1-0 lead into the third period in both of his starts.

Of further notice...this series lasted 362 minutes, 154 of which were played by Osgood and 206 by Hasek. The Wings scored 6 goals and gave up 1 with Ozzie in net, compared to 11 and 10 with Hasek in net, or 11 and 17 for the Preds with Ellis in his 357 minutes.

Basically, it works out like this:

Osgood received 2.34 goals per 60 minutes in support, and won by 1.95 goals per 60 minutes.

Hasek received 3.20 goals per 60 minutes in support, and won by 0.29.

Ellis received 1.85 goals per 60 minutes in support, and lost by 1.01.

Osgood would have won with the goal support of Ellis or Hasek. Ellis would have won with Hasek's support, but not Osgood's. Hasek would not have won with Osgood's or Ellis' support.

Basically, Osgood played well enough to win even though the team wasn't scoring. By comparison, Anaheim lost their series and scored 2.17 goals per game, not far below what the Wings scored with Osgood in net.

GREAT POST - I love stats and that is a top rate job of backing up your asertions with the reality of what happened.

[Bannedforlife 403]

I would appreciate if people stop trying to take a shot at me and talk about the subject. I didn't make the list to say 'hey I'm right and only I'm right.'

I really don't have to defend my opinion. Like I said in OP, I wanted to share my idea and was asking for your thoughts and assessment of round 1. If I ask what's everyone favourite fruit and I say mine is apple, I don't have to listen how orange is better BS. Get my drift? I understand some people here are incredibly sensitive type so maybe I asked for a fire when I opened this thread but jesus, let's hear your assessment rather than hear you bitching about my grade.

It looks to me like you're the one who's being incredibly sensitive. You posted your opinion and it's not unreasonable to expect people to critique those statements. Deal with it.

[RedStormRising 7]

Nicklas Lidstrom A+ : probably wasn't fully confident about his game in game 1, but got his confidence back and never looked back. The shot will go down in history as one of the most amazing shot ever.

Really? Really???? Come on now... maybe as one of the luckiest goal ever, but amazing? Sorry, you lost me right from the start...

[redwinger4747 6]

The Wings' Round One grades should go:

Datsyuk A

Hudler A-

Zetterberg B+

Holmstrom B

Franzen B

Draper B

Cleary B

Samuelsson B-

Drake B-

McCarty B-

Filppula C+

Helm C+

Hartigan C-

Lidstrom A+

Kronwall A-

Rafalski B+

Stuart B-

Chelios B-

Lebda C

Lilja C-

Osgood A+

Hasek B-

This is pretty much spot-on.

[Drake_Marcus 890]

I strongly disagree with a few of Yemack's grades- especially for Hudler, Filppula, Lidstrom and Rafalski. Disagreeing is different from insulting, however, so don't lump me in with some of your more vocal opponents in this thread.

Eva Unit Zero, as one would expect in a numerical evaluation, did a great job evaluating the team.

Here's my attempt to grade the team in round one (overall):

Datsyuk A (he played at his best for most of the series- he was always the best player on the ice this round)

Hudler A- (he was fantastic this series- really, really impressive)

Draper A- (great face-offs as expected, he was one of our top forwards, I was definitely pleasantly surprised with how he raised the level of his game this series)

Franzen A- (he gets a grade boost for being clutch)

Zetterberg B (this grade is low simply because it's Zetterberg and he didn't play up to his own standards!)

Holmstrom B (at times he was a shadow of his past self, other times he was pure 100% Holmstrom... see my comment on Zetterberg)

Cleary B- (still not playing like the Cleary of last year's playoffs- that Cleary would get an A+, but he forechecks like a bastard and gets his nose dirty in the corners)

Drake B- (deserves higher grades for his work in game 6 though)

McCarty B- (great play overall- I expect it to continue to rise)

Helm C+ (fantastic play in games 5 and 6- he's an exciting addition to this team)

Hartigan C (did great all things considered- no one expected him to play more than a 4th liner but he was competent and hard working)

Samuelsson C- (played great in games one and two... horrible otherwise)

Filppula C- (horrible series by Filppula. He was saved from getting an F by the way he played in games 5 and 6- especially the play that lead to the OT goal)

Kronwall A+ (played huge this series- massive hits, tight defense, he's simply elevated his game)

Lidstrom A- (did not play up to his own standards most of the time- seemed less dominant than he's been in the past but he looks to be returning to pre-injury form)

Rafalski A- (so, so critical in sparking the offensive break-outs, a great puck-carrier)

Chelios B (abrasive like he needed to be and dominant on the pk)

Stuart B- (horrible positioning that should be cured over time- see Rafalski in October)

Lebda C (a fast skater)

Lilja C- (brutal in every respect he gets nagged for- he played much, much better in last year's post season)

Osgood A+ (hopefully he carries this level of play through to a cup. this is a generous grade but I can't fault him when I look at his stats and big saves)

Hasek C+ (played fantastic in games 1 and most of 2 but he wasn't playing to his own standards)

Edit: repeated myself

Edited April 22, 2008 by Drake_Marcus

[puckloo39 5,686]

Valid point, although I have a hard time blaming Ozzie for the number of shots faced (or not faced). It's almost like blaming Hudler for doing all his scoring on the man advantage. Oh wait...

To me, goals are goals and shutouts are shutouts, whether you face 20 shots or 40.

this was true in the regular season as well. I never have understood questioning the goalie about the number of shots he faced, as if that's something the goaltender controls.

[Yemack 1]

I strongly disagree with a few of Yemack's grades- especially for Hudler, Filppula, Lidstrom and Rafalski. Disagreeing is different from insulting, however, so don't lump me in with some of your more vocal opponents in this thread.

Eva Unit Zero, as one would expect in a numerical evaluation, did a great job evaluating the team.

No I don't mind people disagree with my idea. In fact, I welcome it. The reason I made opened this thread was to see different views from mine. So thanks for you input. I enjoyed reading it like few others.

I don't care if people want to criticize mine but like I said, Noone can't satisfy everyone by posting the grade. If you want to ***** about how Hudler or Sammy played well, there are already threads about it. I'm sure me or anyone else aren't really keen to hear same verbal war being repeated here. I knew this was going to happen and I took the risk but maybe I have underestimated how people would react Or maybe I made the matters worse by engaging to those comments.

So what is your grade?

[Dawgs 0]

Sammy played way better than an F. He was effective on the forecheck, played a gritty game for a guy that was never described as gritty before (watch the tape of game 6 and see Sammy in action at the end of period 1) and if Hudler had buried a couple chances at wide open nets he would have a nice stat line. He does turn over the puck more than Id like but you gave Rafalski a high grade and he turned it over more than Sammy did. Of all the Wings I thought Rafalski and Cleary played way below expectations. Ill give Cleary a flyer for now but he didnt do anything. Id at least expect him to initiate some contact but to me it looked like he shied away from it.

My biggest beef about the first round was that in games 1-4 the Preds simply owned the boards in our zone. We were content to try and keep them to the outside which didnt seem to work very well. They were allowed to come of the boards and make nice centers resulting in some goals. This has been a problem since February. We improved in game 5 then in game 6 we did an excellent job preventing thier forecheck.

[Yemack 1]

Sammy played way better than an F. He was effective on the forecheck, played a gritty game for a guy that was never described as gritty before (watch the tape of game 6 and see Sammy in action at the end of period 1) and if Hudler had buried a couple chances at wide open nets he would have a nice stat line. He does turn over the puck more than Id like but you gave Rafalski a high grade and he turned it over more than Sammy did. Of all the Wings I thought Rafalski and Cleary played way below expectations. Ill give Cleary a flyer for now but he didnt do anything. Id at least expect him to initiate some contact but to me it looked like he shied away from it.

My biggest beef about the first round was that in games 1-4 the Preds simply owned the boards in our zone. We were content to try and keep them to the outside which didnt seem to work very well. They were allowed to come of the boards and make nice centers resulting in some goals. This has been a problem since February. We improved in game 5 then in game 6 we did an excellent job preventing thier forecheck.

I agree 100% with you about the Preds pushing us around the board. In fact I was thinking about opening a new thread about it.

It seemed to me that every time Wings player were trying to create something in Preds' zone they were right on us and pinned our players to the board. Whereas when Preds were in our zone we just kinda stood behind them and let them make all kinds of play they want and were content being reactionary.

We did better job in game 5 and 6 and maybe it is part of our system where every player has to be ready to move at any time. However I would like to see Wings outman oppositions at point to prevent any kind of play develops in our zone when nothing is going our way. It is a risk to commit more men but sometimes we have to take some risk to get out of funk and we gotta trust Ozzie can keep us out of trouble.

Edited April 22, 2008 by Yemack

[OsGOD 3]

Sammy played way better than an F. He was effective on the forecheck, played a gritty game for a guy that was never described as gritty before (watch the tape of game 6 and see Sammy in action at the end of period 1)

I thought F stood for failure...

FAILURE ^^

Edited April 22, 2008 by OsGOD

[BuckeyeWingsfan80 209]

Zetterberg A-/B+ : I know some people here didn't like his game but I thought he played very well overall. However, he has got to finish the play. I think it is due to inexperience.

I stopped reading right here.