• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Dabura

Are the Wings a Contender?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

TANK IT!!!

It's too late to TANK IT!!!

I don't think we can catch the bottom of the pack at this point. Even if we try our hardest to not try our hardest. Even if every games goes to a shoot out.

Also, Buffalo better slow down too. They're going to get themselves out of the race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's too late to TANK IT!!!

I don't think we can catch the bottom of the pack at this point. Even if we try our hardest to not try our hardest. Even if every games goes to a shoot out.

Also, Buffalo better slow down too. They're going to get themselves out of the race.

The oilers will get him, cause f*** defense!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you see a scrub like Dubinsky crosscheck Zetterberg across the lower back with impunity after there's no call... why should our "stars" even last till the post season. Dubinsky would have gone for stitches at best if this team had more Canadians on it...When you see Hank and Pav mailing it in and when they DO make a play guys like Tatar flub the gimme pass... you start to know the score.

Are you suggesting that we aren't a true contender because one time Henrik Zetterberg got cross checked?

Lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently the Wings are a garbage organization because they don't drop the gloves anytime someone on their team gets cross checked. Something which regularly happens about 50 times a game. I hope the Wings are ready because if some folks have their way, their knuckles are going to be powder by the end of the week.

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's too late to TANK IT!!!

I don't think we can catch the bottom of the pack at this point. Even if we try our hardest to not try our hardest. Even if every games goes to a shoot out.

Also, Buffalo better slow down too. They're going to get themselves out of the race.

It's still possible, we just have to ask the Leafs how to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you see a scrub like Dubinsky crosscheck Zetterberg across the lower back with impunity after there's no call... why should our "stars" even last till the post season. Dubinsky would have gone for stitches at best if this team had more Canadians on it...When you see Hank and Pav mailing it in and when they DO make a play guys like Tatar flub the gimme pass... you start to know the score.

Are you suggesting that we aren't a true contender because one time Henrik Zetterberg got cross checked?

Lol.

I smell troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worth a read, even if you're not big on possession stats:

Shot suppression - Babcock's secret weapon [Winging It In Motown]

I was going to write a post about this and forgot.

We hear people complaining all the time about certain teams, or certain coaches, playing for "the loser point" or just trying to get to overtime.

Doesn't this stand as evidence that Babs is perhaps the worst culprit? I mean, I don't really care as long as we're making the playoffs, but it definitely seems like there's a deliberate strategy to subordinate the offensive potential of the team in favor of a air tight trap. Nobody scores, everybody goes to overtime.

What say you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to write a post about this and forgot.

We hear people complaining all the time about certain teams, or certain coaches, playing for "the loser point" or just trying to get to overtime.

Doesn't this stand as evidence that Babs is perhaps the worst culprit? I mean, I don't really care as long as we're making the playoffs, but it definitely seems like there's a deliberate strategy to subordinate the offensive potential of the team in favor of a air tight trap. Nobody scores, everybody goes to overtime.

What say you?

In the end it's probably a good plan for a team just outside of the top tier teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the end it's probably a good plan for a team just outside of the top tier teams.

Sure. But I'll be sure to take all those "I can't stand Columbus (or Nashville, or whoever), all they do is trap and play for overtime" comments with a grain of salt from now on. Particularly since we've got A LOT more offensive potential that we're intentionally not utilizing in order to play this system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to write a post about this and forgot.

We hear people complaining all the time about certain teams, or certain coaches, playing for "the loser point" or just trying to get to overtime.

Doesn't this stand as evidence that Babs is perhaps the worst culprit? I mean, I don't really care as long as we're making the playoffs, but it definitely seems like there's a deliberate strategy to subordinate the offensive potential of the team in favor of a air tight trap. Nobody scores, everybody goes to overtime.

What say you?

So you take an article that credits Babcock's coaching with increasing the Wings chances to win, and spin it that he's the "worst culprit" of playing for the loser point? :lol:

Honestly some of the statistical stuff is beyond me in that article, but it reaches an understandable conclusion. Babcock has required his forwards to be defensively responsible for a while now, and often errs on the side of that responsibility over offensive potential.

This team no longer has the firepower to open things up offensively. And their blueline is pretty thin so it requires a total team effort to limit shots.

Sure. But I'll be sure to take all those "I can't stand Columbus (or Nashville, or whoever), all they do is trap and play for overtime" comments with a grain of salt from now on. Particularly since we've got A LOT more offensive potential that we're intentionally not utilizing in order to play this system.

Certainly more than we had last year, but where exactly is all this offensive potential that's not getting utilized?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you take an article that credits Babcock's coaching with increasing the Wings chances to win, and spin it that he's the "worst culprit" of playing for the loser point? :lol:

Honestly some of the statistical stuff is beyond me in that article, but it reaches an understandable conclusion. Babcock has required his forwards to be defensively responsible for a while now, and often errs on the side of that responsibility over offensive potential.

This team no longer has the firepower to open things up offensively. And their blueline is pretty thin so it requires a total team effort to limit shots.

I think you're misunderstanding. I'm not trying to knock his coaching. We're winning, what do I care? BUT, the stats don't lie, and one of your premises isn't correct..namely that the team no longer has "firepower".

Babcock himself has said this is the best team he's had since 2009, and between Tatar, Datsyuk, Franzen, Z, Nyquist, Jurco, Sheahan, and Weiss he's got considerable more offensive potential than he's had in the last 5 or 6 years, yet the stats show that our "shots for" is considerably lower than it was during that period. We're shooting less than we did two or three years ago, with WAY more talent.

What I'm saying is that we've got an offensively capable team, and yet we're playing a system that is so geared toward defense that the offense is shooting MUCH less than when we had less offensively capable teams. It's clearly working, as we're winning games and holding teams to very few shots. But you can't deny that no shots against, and no shots for, is a recipe for overtime, no?

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Babcock himself has said this is the best team he's had since 2009, and between Tatar, Datsyuk, Franzen, Z, Nyquist, Jurco, Sheahan, and Weiss he's got considerable more offensive potential than he's had in the last 5 or 6 years, yet the stats show that our "shots for" is considerably lower than it was during that period. We're shooting less than we did two or three years ago, with WAY more talent.

What I'm saying is that we've got an offensively capable team, and yet we're playing a system that is so geared toward defense that the offense is shooting MUCH less than when we had less offensively capable teams. It's clearly working, as we're winning games and holding teams to very few shots. But you can't deny that no shots against, and no shots for, is a recipe for overtime, no?

"Best team" says nothing specifically about offensive talent. And 5 or 6 years is going back a bit too far.

It also completely ignores the defensive corps, which plays a huge role in generating offense. The Wings have more offensive talent up front than they'd had the last few seasons, but not so much on the blue line. They're not great at moving the puck out of their own end and absolutely terrible at getting any shots through from the point.

When you misrepresent the article as saying "no shots against and no shots for," of course it sounds like a recipe for overtime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you take an article that credits Babcock's coaching with increasing the Wings chances to win, and spin it that he's the "worst culprit" of playing for the loser point? :lol:

Honestly some of the statistical stuff is beyond me in that article, but it reaches an understandable conclusion. Babcock has required his forwards to be defensively responsible for a while now, and often errs on the side of that responsibility over offensive potential.

This team no longer has the firepower to open things up offensively. And their blueline is pretty thin so it requires a total team effort to limit shots.

Certainly more than we had last year, but where exactly is all this offensive potential that's not getting utilized?

The team, as a whole, is more offensively capable that it was two or three years ago is my point. I'm not sure how to quantify it, but a team with Bertuzzi, Abby, Franzen, Zetterberg, Datyuk, Filppula, and sometimes Cleary as a top six certainly SEEMS like offensively capable that one with Datsyuk, Tatar, Nyquist, Zetterberg, Abby, and Franzen. Plus, our third line is pretty obviously more offensively capable with Weiss, Jurco, and Sheahan. So why is the current incarnation shooting less? Perhaps because they're almost entirely focused on playing defense?

"Best team" says nothing specifically about offensive talent. And 5 or 6 years is going back a bit too far.

It also completely ignores the defensive corps, which plays a huge role in generating offense. The Wings have more offensive talent up front than they'd had the last few seasons, but not so much on the blue line. They're not great at moving the puck out of their own end and absolutely terrible at getting any shots through from the point.

When you misrepresent the article as saying "no shots against and no shots for," of course it sounds like a recipe for overtime.

The charts in the article SPECIFICALLY represent "shots for AND shots against" as a whole. And this year's team is shooting less, and holding their opponents to MUCH fewer shots. I'm not sure how I'm misrepresenting anything.

If you're not shooting, and you're not letting the other team shoot much, then you're going to go to a lot of overtimes.

Why are you being so combative about this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The team, as a whole, is more offensively capable that it was two or three years ago is my point. I'm not sure how to quantify it, but a team with Bertuzzi, Abby, Franzen, Zetterberg, Datyuk, Filppula, and sometimes Cleary as a top six certainly SEEMS like offensively capable that one with Datsyuk, Tatar, Nyquist, Zetterberg, Abby, and Franzen. Plus, our third line is pretty obviously more offensively capable with Weiss, Jurco, and Sheahan. So why is the current incarnation shooting less? Perhaps because they're almost entirely focused on playing defense?

The charts in the article SPECIFICALLY represent "shots for AND shots against" as a whole. And this year's team is shooting less, and holding their opponents to MUCH fewer shots. I'm not sure how I'm misrepresenting anything.

If you're not shooting, and you're not letting the other team shoot much, then you're going to go to a lot of overtimes.

Why are you being so combative about this?

You're probably not sure how to quantify it because it's an opinion. There is no way to quantify it. But you're stating it as if it were fact that the Wings are sacrificing a massive amount of offense to play this way. Clearly they're focusing on defense and that probably does cost some offensive opportunities. How much? Who knows.

The charts in the article show that Detroit is slightly below middle of the pack in generating shots for. They generate almost as many shots as Pittsburgh. More than the Rangers and Columbus. By that evidence alone, they are nowhere near the worst offender of playing for the loser point. By the numbers that looks like it would be New Jersey.

I'm being combative, I'm just pointing out that you took an article complimenting Babcock and turned it into proof he's playing for the loser point. Which the article doesn't support. And it doesn't even make a ton of sense given the Wings record in the shootout and how Babcock clearly feels about the event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you suggesting that we aren't a true contender because one time Henrik Zetterberg got cross checked?

Lol.

No you dope... try to follow along... I'm saying that if a team wants to contend, they need to have their lineup intact. A team like the Wings needs to have ALL of their top tier players healthy. EVERYBODY knows Zetterberg has had serious lower back issues and when an opposing team targets that area, you need to send a message to the other teams who would love to see Hank sidelined down the stretch. Doing nothing in this case is unacceptable... More to the point was my comment about Hank and Pav playing embarrassingly bad of late and our lack of scoring. Part of that could be because you have a world class player in Datsyuk playing with a good defensive forward like Helm WTF? SURPRISE we aren't scoring! Babcock is a good coach but he's overrated and doesn't make a change until it's way too late and the game is over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this