Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Bigger Picture Question - What was the deciding factor?


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 RedWingsRox

RedWingsRox

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,108 posts
  • Location:Vancouver, BC

Posted 13 May 2011 - 09:43 AM

It's the day after and it still feels empty :( ... don't want this to be Lids' last year but ...

Don't know if it is too early to assess but just stepping back a bit and wondering why we lost to same team 2 years in a row. When Chicago did it to Vancouver, there were some serious questions asked. Some say that Canucks retooled specifically to beat Chicago in the playoffs. So, from the bigger picture perspective, we loss to the same team in round 2 twice ... what was the deciding factor? With all due respect to Babs, was it that SJ had a better overall coaching staff? Was it injuries (a bit of a weak/lame excuse)? Was it that SJ just had better and deeper roster?

My initial thinking is that although we got one of the best head coaches, SJ's coaching staff was a bit sharper than ours. Our special team and defensive coach needs to be re-evaluated. Of course, it wouldn't hurt if we picked up another power forward who can score 20+ per season.

#2 Berry

Berry

    Top Prospect

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 63 posts
  • Location:Lausanne, Switzerland

Posted 13 May 2011 - 10:10 AM

Destiny. It was a battle between 2 similar teams. Detroit was more injured than SJ but this makes no difference (playoffs don't stop...).

I'm proud to be a fan of this team, big hearts, big guys.

#3 Johnny Law

Johnny Law

    4th Line Grinder

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 287 posts

Posted 13 May 2011 - 10:14 AM

Logan Couture, we simply don't have second tier scoring like that with Franzen out of the lineup.

Injuries certainly didn't help and Abdelkader and Hudler were not very good.

#4 Crymson

Crymson

    Ninjelephant

  • Gold Booster
  • 11,032 posts
  • Location:Denver, CO, USA

Posted 13 May 2011 - 11:06 AM

Is everyone forgetting the horrible bounces that lost games one and three for us?

#5 hockey&beer

hockey&beer

    4th Line Grinder

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 205 posts
  • Location:North of Detroit, way south of heaven.

Posted 13 May 2011 - 11:16 AM

I don't recall who said it last night in the pre-game but, "either team could have won any of the games". These two are so evenly matched that there isn't anything the Wings could specifically change to alter the out come of the games.

When all is said and done, the only real difference was SJ was better than Detroit on special teams. Their PP converted and won them games 1-3 and, obviously, w/o their PP goal and shutting the Wings down on their opportunities, game 7 would have ended differently.
"Matt Moulson... he would get more air time if he was Matt Labatt." Ken Daniels

#6 Konnan511

Konnan511

    #FreePulkkinen

  • HoF Booster
  • 10,295 posts
  • Location:Traverse City, Mi

Posted 13 May 2011 - 11:23 AM

I think the biggest factor was size and speed of their players. Ericsson has size but zero strength. Kronwall and Stuart hit like Mack Trucks, but aren't able to knock people off pucks in the corners. Datsyuk and Lidstrom use their superior stick work to get people off the puck. Bertuzzi does a good job of jamming pucks loose.

We just need one or two big DMen who can skate fairly decent and can deliver a decent outlet pass. As long as Kronwall and Lidstrom and Rafalski are on this team, those bottom DMen don't need to be point producers, they just need to be strong DMen how play a very sound defensive game. i think that would have won us the series in 5 games or less.

Of note: I still think we had a great shot at winning this series in 6 or less if a bounce or two would have gone our way. That Ferrio (sp) goal and the Pavelski mid air bat goal are perfect examples of the bounces going their way in key situations that turned the series in their favor.
The Best Of BC
HankthaTank
- Squirrels, they hate to be thrown. / Why is the magical unicorn named Brian... Jedi - I just downloaded the "kids" book, "Go the F--k to Sleep" as narrated by Samuel L. Jackson on my kindle. I am now ready to be a daddy. / *Checks Router* No, I'm positive I didn't hit the "Wings Defense Sucks" button. Electrophile - I'm just glad the Wings were able to win despite the Curse of Brian. ACallToArms - I think Trey needs to put something about payroll tax and deferred income in his sig... Edicius - I'd rather [have] a soundbite of me saying "I like (man sausage)" rather than "I like Crosby".

#7 VM1138

VM1138

    Legend

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,518 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 13 May 2011 - 11:31 AM

I honestly don't think it has anything to do with the teams as a whole. San Jose dominated often (like they usually do) because of their size and reach of their cycling game. But they weren't deeper, our stars are better than their stars. Let's look back at the series, shall we?

Game 1: Decided entirely by refs. Probably should have gone to Detroit.
Game 2: San Jose outplayed Detroit, deserved to win. Series tied 1-1.
Game 3: Very even game, Detroit could easily have won, but of course it needed the storybook ending of the team being dominated scoring an easy overtime goal. Series could be 2-1 either way at this point, but let's cede this to the Wings without the underdog reffing in the final minutes.
Game 4: Detroit eked out a win. Detroit up 3-1.
Game 5: Four and five were very evenly played, so we'll say the Sharks win this one. The Wings got pretty lucky, so 3-2 Wings at this point.
Game 6: The Wings dominate, close out the series. Wings win 4-2.

So no, I wouldn't say San Jose was obviously a better team in any way. Our powerplay sucked and the team got off to a bad start.
Check out my short e-book on the Red Wings' 1937 Stanley Cup championship entitled: "Nothing Could Keep 'Em Down." Please download it from my profile at Smashwords: https://www.smashwor...ile/view/victor

New e-book: The Spanish-American War: A Brief History. Relatively short, introductory read for casual history buffs and people who want to learn more about a forgotten war that changed America. Available at BN.com, Smashwords, Kobo, and Diesel E-Books right now. Same link as above.

#8 haroldsnepsts

haroldsnepsts

    "Classy"

  • HoF Booster Mod
  • 16,910 posts

Posted 13 May 2011 - 12:04 PM

Logan Couture, we simply don't have second tier scoring like that with Franzen out of the lineup.

Injuries certainly didn't help and Abdelkader and Hudler were not very good.

Mostly this.

The media is probably already writing the revisionist history about how good Thornton was most of this series, but the big guns on San Jose - Thornton, Marleau and Heatley didn't do much. Pavelski too, who I feel is often a Wings killer, was pretty quiet. At the beginning of the series if you had told me those guys were limited to as few points as they were, I would definitely have liked the Wings chances.

But Clowe, Setoguchi, and Couture stepped up big time. Boyle too. Other than Thornton's faceoffs, those other guys were the heart of that team against Detroit.

Franzen, Bert, Cleary, Hudler were too injured and/or could not compete at that level. Datsyuk and Zetterberg can only do so much.

It also shows that regular season wins do matter when they give away what should be easy points. If the Wings had picked up one more win in the regular season, they would've had home ice against the Sharks. Not sure how much of a difference it would've made, but it wouldn't have hurt. Especially in game 7 when early on they were getting dominated in the faceoff circle.

#9 Nev

Nev

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,050 posts
  • Location:Lincolnshire, England

Posted 13 May 2011 - 12:12 PM

I think the biggest factor was size and speed of their players. Ericsson has size but zero strength. Kronwall and Stuart hit like Mack Trucks, but aren't able to knock people off pucks in the corners. Datsyuk and Lidstrom use their superior stick work to get people off the puck. Bertuzzi does a good job of jamming pucks loose.

We just need one or two big DMen who can skate fairly decent and can deliver a decent outlet pass. As long as Kronwall and Lidstrom and Rafalski are on this team, those bottom DMen don't need to be point producers, they just need to be strong DMen how play a very sound defensive game. i think that would have won us the series in 5 games or less.


I agree. Their 2nd + 3rd lines were bigger, stronger, faster and better than our 2nd and 3rd defence pairings.

Edited by Nev, 13 May 2011 - 12:27 PM.

"If I can be totally honest, it's not a lot of guys you get impressed by. Actually, it's no one else but him. From the bench, to see what move he makes -- you're like, 'I wish I could do that.' Sometimes you sit on the bench and just think, 'wow,' and you look over to the other bench and they sit there and shake their heads, too. He has great, great skills. I'm probably not going to play with another player who has the kind of skills he has." Mikael Samuelsson on Pavel Datsyuk

#10 haroldsnepsts

haroldsnepsts

    "Classy"

  • HoF Booster Mod
  • 16,910 posts

Posted 13 May 2011 - 12:26 PM

I agree. Their 2nd + 3rd lines were bigger, faster and better than our 2nd and 3rd defence pairings.

I'm guessing that's why Babcock had mixed up the pairings this year. Stuart and Lids never really played particularly well together this season, but it mixes up some size and physicality on the pairings. It's not like the early years when Murphy and Nick could handle the Legion of Doom line by playing the puck and not the body. It's been a continuing strategy for the Wings with having guys like Schneider and now Raf on the top pairing, but the reality is that Lids and Rafalski are getting up there in years and have lost a step, so against a team like San Jose it would be too hard to battle around the net.

Stuart and Kronwall can hold their own fairly well. Assuming we keep Ericsson he still needs to play more physical. More like he did in the first round. And Salei has apparently stopped playing with an edge. Kindl's got good size, but it'd be nice to have someone big that will really make guys pay around the Wings net.

Edited by haroldsnepsts, 13 May 2011 - 12:26 PM.


#11 EastLansingNative

EastLansingNative

    Goon

  • Gold Booster
  • 368 posts
  • Location:Orygun

Posted 13 May 2011 - 12:46 PM

Our superstars need to score like superstars, and our depth needs to surprise everyone with tons of offense.
We've won cups with one or the other, or both, it's tough to win without either.
That, and yeah, the bounces were rough...
You do that, you go to the box, you know.
Two minutes, by yourself, you know and you feel shame, you know.
And then you get free.

#12 Majsheppard

Majsheppard

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,512 posts

Posted 13 May 2011 - 12:50 PM

Well last year it was the refs, this year was that they wanted it more.
"It is a lot easier to be an ******* to words than to people"-xkcd

Tootoo does NOT belong on this team. He is classless and I would rather see the Wings be bad than classless. I feel the same way about Bertuzzi as well, but he at least CAN make the team better. With Tootoo the team becomes worse and in danger of being classless. Would you have liked Claude on the team? Or Roy? No. So why would you be okay with that POS.

This thread has been closed due to emotions being higher than people's ability to read, interpret, and properly respond to simple posts.

#13 HankthaTank

HankthaTank

    3rd Line Center

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

Posted 13 May 2011 - 12:57 PM

Our superstars need to score like superstars

Agreed with your entire post except this part. Our superstars were incredible for us this series.
TO WHOM MUCH IS GIVEN, MUCH IS EXPECTED.

#14 MGreenberg

MGreenberg

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Location:Back in Michigan

Posted 13 May 2011 - 12:58 PM

It was depth. Guys like Couture, Setoguchi, Clowe out played pretty much all of the Wings second tier forwards.

Edited by MGreenberg, 13 May 2011 - 01:00 PM.

  • Nev likes this

#15 Shaman

Shaman

    Die hard Red Wing fan and realist.

  • Silver Booster
  • 3,841 posts
  • Location:Kalamazoo Michigan (WMU)

Posted 13 May 2011 - 12:58 PM

A coin flip series ended in a coin flip. I think if they played 700 games against each other it would have ended 350 wins each or in that ball park, these two teams stack up really well against each other. And heres my question:

What if the Wings only have 4-5 days off between games? not over a week? Would they have come out stronger?
Feuer und Wasser kommt nicht zusammen
Kann man nicht binden sind nicht verwandt
In Funken versunken steh ich in Flammen
und bin im Wasser verbrannt
Im Wasser verbrannt

#16 Jersey Wing

Jersey Wing

    Watching Eastern Conference hockey before it was cool...

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,078 posts
  • Location:Jersey City, NJ

Posted 13 May 2011 - 01:01 PM

We had two chances to win ONE overtime game. We lost them both. With a win in just ONE of those games it's over in 6 games.

Overtime games are opportunities. The Wings didn't capitalize on those opportunities.

14767451334_8f0d14d8cb_o.jpg


#17 Grypho

Grypho

    Sharks Fan

  • HoF Booster
  • 487 posts
  • Location:Saigon, Vietnam

Posted 13 May 2011 - 01:28 PM

I get lambasted for this a lot, especially by Sharks fans, who just want to play the mindless we-were-simply-the-better-team card, but I'm going to say it anyway.

Despite several games where the score did not reflect the shots, scoring chances, or superior performance by one team over the other, everyone knows our series was a virtual coin-flip throughout, right down to the final seconds of last night's game. (and I agree with those who called it a 1 game edge to the Wings)

I think the Wings were victims of their early success against Phoenix, as they were forced to ramp their playoff intensity and stamina back up (as they definitely did) from their extended rest period after sweeping the Yotes. That rest obviously helped injured players like Z and Mule, but I think it hurt the overall team far more than helped, and made all the difference in a series that I thought should otherwise have gone convincingly to the Wings in 5 or 6.

The Wings had 9 days off, the Sharks had only 4, but I predicted that the Wings would bring an increased level of intensity to each successive game in the series, which reached an astonishing peak in Game 7, which finally revealed the intense Wings seen in all four games against Phoenix.

I'm still compiling playoff history data to see if there's anything statistically meaningful, but looking only in terms of the level of intensity and stamina each team brought to each game, relative to themselves and their previous games only, and not the scoreboard or the other team, this series went the way I thought it would.

Yeah, I don't think that the Sharks could have been swept by Chicago last year if the Sharks had not had 8 days rest. At best we would have given them a run for their money, and a longer series at least. The Sharks were on a too-little-too-late ramp as well. But I don't think the Sharks would even be facing the Nucks now if the teams had both had 4 days of rest, because I thought the Wings were the better team this year overall.

A coin flip series ended in a coin flip. I think if they played 700 games against each other it would have ended 350 wins each or in that ball park, these two teams stack up really well against each other. And heres my question:

What if the Wings only have 4-5 days off between games? not over a week? Would they have come out stronger?


Oh, wow, I posted but missed this, sorry.

Yes, with 4-5 days off, I absolutely believe that the Wings would have been an unstoppable juggernaut against the Sharks.


FINAL EDIT:

I think it's fortunate for the Nucks that the Preds gave them a harder time than they expected. By Sunday, the Nucks will have had 6 days rest. The Sharks will have had 3. Not a big difference, but I consider 4 days the maximum before "rust" (a steady bleeding decrease in playoff stamina and intensity) starts to set in. Small advantage to the Sharks for at least Game 1. And again, I'm not talking about what happens on the scoreboard, but in how well these teams skate against one another over 60 minutes of play, and then comparing that to what each team brings to the next game relative to their prior capacity.

Edited by Grypho, 13 May 2011 - 01:42 PM.


#18 The Secret

The Secret

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,199 posts
  • Location:Ottawa, ON

Posted 13 May 2011 - 01:48 PM

Deciding factors in game 7: Yet another slow start 1st period + 0 shots on net for 4 whole Power Plays

Over-all Sharks capitalized on more chances and had some good luck helping at times. They seemed hungrier and better poised much more consistently. I thought on paper we had more depth but their 3rd and 4th liners were there for them also.

Edited by The Secret, 13 May 2011 - 01:52 PM.


#19 Taylorov

Taylorov

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 163 posts

Posted 13 May 2011 - 01:51 PM

Game 1 - Refs
Game 3 - Lucky bounce
Game 7 - PP sucked & Injuries

#20 StayClassy

StayClassy

    Babcock's Doormat

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 63 posts
  • Location:Columbus,OH

Posted 13 May 2011 - 01:56 PM

I don't like to make excuses, but I am going to blame injuries for this one. All these one goal loses and Franzen getting 0pts. I have to believe a healthy Mule puts them over the top.

"Let him live."






Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users