Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

If Wings faced Hawks in 3rd Round


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 KrazyGangsta

KrazyGangsta

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Gold Booster
  • 2,465 posts
  • Location:Montreal

Posted 24 May 2010 - 12:41 PM

If the Wings had prevailed and beat the Sharks in the 2nd round. How do you guys think we would of handled ourselves facing the 'Hawks in the 3rd round?

I really feel that we would of been matched up better against the Hawks then the Sharks did.

#2 GMRwings1983

GMRwings1983

    The Killer is Me

  • Silver Booster
  • 21,076 posts
  • Location:Jerkwater, USA

Posted 24 May 2010 - 12:46 PM

Well, that wouldnt' be hard considering how San Jose got swept.

I thought we'd match up well with San Jose based on our previous dominance of them, and look how that went for us. Before the playoffs, I wanted us to play Chicago because I thought it'd be a good matchup for us.

However, based on what happened with us and San Jose, we probably would lose to Chicago. Better to lose to the Sharks than to the Hawks when it's all said and done with.
According to my profile, my reputation is excellent. LOL.

#3 Broken 16

Broken 16

    Bonecrushing Blueliner

  • Gold Booster
  • 2,959 posts

Posted 24 May 2010 - 12:49 PM

Well, that wouldnt' be hard considering how San Jose got swept.

I thought we'd match up well with San Jose based on our previous dominance of them, and look how that went for us. Before the playoffs, I wanted us to play Chicago because I thought it'd be a good matchup for us.

However, based on what happened with us and San Jose, we probably would lose to Chicago. Better to lose to the Sharks than to the Hawks when it's all said and done with.



This. Faceoffs killed us more than anything and Chicago is better at faceoffs than San Jose. I'm glad we lost to San Jose too, because it leaves that little shadow of doubt in the Hawks as far as them beating us. But I think we would have gotten schooled.

#4 stevkrause

stevkrause

    Legend

  • Bronze Booster
  • 5,236 posts
  • Location:Detroit, MI

Posted 24 May 2010 - 12:54 PM

Well, that wouldnt' be hard considering how San Jose got swept.

I thought we'd match up well with San Jose based on our previous dominance of them, and look how that went for us. Before the playoffs, I wanted us to play Chicago because I thought it'd be a good matchup for us.

However, based on what happened with us and San Jose, we probably would lose to Chicago. Better to lose to the Sharks than to the Hawks when it's all said and done with.

I think we would have given them more of a series, but in the end, I think we would have lost... the main reasons we lost to San Jose were faceoffs and poor PP and Chicago's faceoffs and PK are as good, if not better than San Jose's... so chances are, the end result would have been the same, just a little later...

All I have to say about Holland and our off-season:

Here in this thread

Here in this one as well

Here in this one too

and finally

Here


Holland is a damn good GM. period.


#5 Yzerman191

Yzerman191

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,245 posts
  • Location:Waterford, MI

Posted 24 May 2010 - 12:54 PM

I agree with the previous posters; Chicago would have won. I don't think we would have gotten swept, but there's not much doubt in my mind that we would have lost the series. IMO, Chicago is the best team in the league this year. They are absolutely stacked everywhere but in goal, and their young goaltender is proving himself to be just as good, if not better, as Jimmy Howard. Kane, Toews, Hossa, Sharp, Versteeg, Byfuglien, Keith, Seabrook, Campbell, etc. They've got a roster as stacked as the 'Wings did last year. Luckily for the rest of the league, the cap is going to level the playing field a bit (the same way it did to the Red Wings).

#6 Taylorov

Taylorov

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 163 posts

Posted 24 May 2010 - 01:00 PM

Depends on officiating.

#7 Heroes of Hockeytown

Heroes of Hockeytown

    Big Goal Bob

  • Bronze Booster
  • 13,729 posts

Posted 24 May 2010 - 01:05 PM

Even though the Wings lost to San Jose I don't think it's necessarily true that they would have lost to Chicago; all of the games were so close and turned on such lucky/fluky plays, if they played them all again the outcome could have been very different. They don't, which is right and proper, but Detroit's loss to San Jose and San Jose's loss to Chicago doesn't naturally imply the transitive property of Detroit losing to Chicago.

However, it's definitely true that the Wings are a weaker team and the Hawks are a better team this season, a considerable shift from last year in fact. The loss of Sammy (who was clutch), Hudler (less so), Hossa (for whom I know there is no love lost but probably had his best series in the WCF), Cleary scoring like a maniac, and Ozzie being in beastmode; versus the Hawks solidified goaltending (via some complete nobody with a funny name, but that's the trend) and continued ascension of their young folk, probably doesn't spell a happy ending for the Wings.
"We've been in the same spot all year long. We won 50 games for the fourth year in a row. People think we're just hum-drum and boring.
No, you know what we are, we're good. You can't do what we do every single day and not be good." - Mike Babcock

#8 GoOzzieGo

GoOzzieGo

    Top Prospect

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 88 posts
  • Location:Hell, MI

Posted 24 May 2010 - 01:13 PM

Kane, Toews, Hossa, Sharp, Versteeg, Byfuglien, Keith, Seabrook, Campbell, etc. They've got a roster as stacked as the 'Wings did last year. Luckily for the rest of the league, the cap is going to level the playing field a bit (the same way it did to the Red Wings).


I'm not up on the Hawks or the cap. Who are they likely to lose or have to move in the off season?

#9 Broken 16

Broken 16

    Bonecrushing Blueliner

  • Gold Booster
  • 2,959 posts

Posted 24 May 2010 - 01:20 PM

Depends on officiating.



Depends of face-off proficiency. Wings need to either work on face-offs big time... or learn to cheat better. That's the most glaring thing to me.

#10 IceMunkee

IceMunkee

    Gangster-ish

  • HoF Booster
  • 1,261 posts
  • Location:Garden City, MI

Posted 24 May 2010 - 01:24 PM

Since the Sharks beat us pretty handidly and the still played better hockey against the Hawks then we did them I would venture to say we lose. Although I heard Kane poops himself everytime he plays the Wings and it is tough playing with squishy butt.
www.thedscene.com
@Gay4Datsyuk
Check It Out!

#11 GoWings1905

GoWings1905

    Legend

  • Gold Booster
  • 5,647 posts

Posted 24 May 2010 - 01:24 PM

Chicago would have won, but the Red Wings would have given them a way better series.

After watching the WCF play out, it just makes me feel that San Jose beating the Red Wings was pretty much a fluke. Everything went the Sharks way against Detroit and they got clearly exposed by probably the best team in the league. Without the refs handing the Sharks games or Howard blowing game three, the Red Wings could have easily taken that series.

It was all or nothing for the Blackhawks this season. The cap is going to wreck their depth just like it did to the Red Wings.
 
 
"To whom much is given, much is expected."
 
 

 

 

 

 


#12 HankthaTank

HankthaTank

    3rd Line Center

  • Silver Booster
  • 4,815 posts
  • Location:Warren, MI

Posted 24 May 2010 - 01:36 PM

Sure wouldn't have liked our odds especially in a 2nd year in a row type series (ie Pens in the Finals). Has just been the Hawks' year. Or whatever....
TO WHOM MUCH IS GIVEN, MUCH IS EXPECTED.

#13 Puckpossession

Puckpossession

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 113 posts

Posted 24 May 2010 - 01:36 PM

Chicago would have won, but the Red Wings would have given them a way better series.

After watching the WCF play out, it just makes me feel that San Jose beating the Red Wings was pretty much a fluke. Everything went the Sharks way against Detroit and they got clearly exposed by probably the best team in the league. Without the refs handing the Sharks games or Howard blowing game three, the Red Wings could have easily taken that series.

It was all or nothing for the Blackhawks this season. The cap is going to wreck their depth just like it did to the Red Wings.


Chicago blackhawks are fast, just like we were last year, any fast team in the playoffs gives san jose nightmares, especially speed and skill that they cant match,

#14 Doc Holliday

Doc Holliday

    LGW's impromptu Photoshopper

  • Silver Booster
  • 4,341 posts

Posted 24 May 2010 - 01:40 PM

Hawks in 6, likely.

Maybe 5. I think simply because Q is their coach Detroit would have won at least one game.

Posted Image


#15 magicaldatsyuk

magicaldatsyuk

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 147 posts
  • Location:Indianapolis, Indiana

Posted 24 May 2010 - 03:03 PM

This. Faceoffs killed us more than anything and Chicago is better at faceoffs than San Jose. I'm glad we lost to San Jose too, because it leaves that little shadow of doubt in the Hawks as far as them beating us. But I think we would have gotten schooled.


i dont know how you can say the blackhawks are better at faceoffs than the sharks when the sharks won more faceoffs in 3 out of the 4 games...
"failing to prepare is the same as preparing for failure."- John Wooden

#16 Broken 16

Broken 16

    Bonecrushing Blueliner

  • Gold Booster
  • 2,959 posts

Posted 24 May 2010 - 03:18 PM

i dont know how you can say the blackhawks are better at faceoffs than the sharks when the sharks won more faceoffs in 3 out of the 4 games...



Ya, but the games I was watching, the Blackhawks won a majority of the crucial offensive and defensive zone faceoffs. Those are the ones that will kill you quick.

#17 EZBAKETHAGANGSTA

EZBAKETHAGANGSTA

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,731 posts
  • Location:Da Ville Mi

Posted 24 May 2010 - 03:23 PM

If the Wings had prevailed and beat the Sharks in the 2nd round. How do you guys think we would of handled ourselves facing the 'Hawks in the 3rd round?

I really feel that we would of been matched up better against the Hawks then the Sharks did.

People need to realize that the Hawks are a lot better then many give them credit on here, and arguably played better than their roster looked on paper, something that was missing for a lot of this year for the Wings. I know it hurts to admit it, but the difference in levels of intensity is just unreal this year (though there are a myriad of excuses for the Wings, many of which hold valid), and the Hawks really put it all into winning it this year, at the expense of a lot of their future depth.


As for the series, I really think we had the capability to beat them, and vice versa. In my mind we were a bit less talented and slower version of them, but had a lot more experience and more of an "x-factor" feel, so I think beating them would have certainly not be a huge upset by any means.
I really think a lot of people don't give the Hawk's depth and Defense enough credit, so I would not have been surprised if we lost.

With that being said, I really think the Phoenix series wore us out, and as much as I'm tempted to blame the horrible officiating in the SJ series, the facts are the Wing's were either just too tired or didn't play up to their potential to win a 7 game series vs the Sharks. If the same effort was shown towards the Hawks that was shown in the vast majority of the San Jose series we would be out in 5-6 games, all of them being close games but with the same feeling of "We're just as good, they're just playing better" that was seen in game 5 of SJ.

Ya, but the games I was watching, the Blackhawks won a majority of the crucial offensive and defensive zone faceoffs. Those are the ones that will kill you quick.


Oh hell yeah, say what you want about the dives some thing SJ through, but one thing that cannot be denied is that they took one of the simplest aspects in the game and enforced it to a ridiculous, and in my mind unfair, extent.
Victory Honda Forever.

Like my posts? Contact Hossa4life for information regarding my fan club

#18 Miss Wing Queen

Miss Wing Queen

    Hockeytown's Helmetless Hero

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 523 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 24 May 2010 - 03:57 PM

I think it would have depended on what version of the Wings showed up to play. I think it would have been a tighter series than the SJ/Chi series and the Det/SJ series, but I feel we still would have had a better chance of losing than winning. Chicago is very determined this year, and it shows it their ability to hang around and grind out a win however they can.

Saying that, though, I felt the Sharks looked extremely slow and could not take advantage of any of the opportunities they were given. The didn't play completely horribly, but for much of what I saw, their being out of position and not jumping on second and third chances cost them those goals that might have won a game for them. In a lot of ways, I felt I was re-watching the Det/SJ series but with the Sharks playing worse than the Wings.

Like others have said, I'm kind of glad that we didn't play Chicago this year and have that possibility of getting beaten by them. We weren't showing our true colors in this year's playoffs, and I like the fact that if Chicago does go on to win the Cup, there is still that little asterisk in the back of Chicago's mind that says: *But we didn't have to go through Detroit to get here. :(

Next year will definitely be interesting. And I can't wait.

#19 SuperNovaXll

SuperNovaXll

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,699 posts
  • Location:Long Island, NY

Posted 24 May 2010 - 04:58 PM

Depends of face-off proficiency. Wings need to either work on face-offs big time... or learn to cheat better. That's the most glaring thing to me.

Ill do one better. Depends on face-offs AND officiating. :cool:

Honestly though, I think we would have pushed the Hawks to game 6 or 7, but would have lost in the end. This year just wasnt our year from the start.
Long Island Wings Fan since 1991

#20 jollymania

jollymania

    Heavy Hitter

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,610 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 24 May 2010 - 05:38 PM

I feel if Stuey and Kronner were both 100% healthy we could take on the hawks, one of the two woudl either destroy Toews or Kane like Kronner did to havlat last year. They are two of the best hitters in the league, sure Murray can hit harder, but he did nothing to punish any of the blackhawks in their series, Kronner has been know to make series impacting hits that just weren't there this year because of his knee.
"I assure you the hits along the boards he(Aaron Downey) constantly threw SEVERAL TIMES EVERY SHIFT were far more damaging hits that what Kronwall throws."
- uk_redwing
HockeyArchive Twitter





Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users