10/17 GDT: Detroit Red Wings @ Montreal Canadiens, 7:00 EST

[Hockeymom1960 5,107]

Are you suggesting that fighting would stop it?

Did I say fighting?

Tf you want him to do? Watch him like a hawk and slide tackle him as he attempts to run into goalie?

"AHHH we play Montreal? Let me sit in the corner and wait for that number 11 muhahaha soon as he attempts to run into the goalie I shall teleport in the middle and greet his legs with my beard muahhaha!"

Making a statement goes a long way actually.

Not saying anything wouldn't. I'm glad he called him out. It's out there in the media now and his track record is now on public display for fans and league.

Zberg did the captain thing by being vocal, basically calling out the league and montreal. Nothing more the Wings can do about it unless you're suggesting they fight him.

I never said to fight now did I.

[Echolalia 2,961]

Did I say fighting?

I never said to fight now did I.

I never said you did. I asked if that's what you were referring to because you didn't specify, and still haven't. So again, if you don't mean fighting, what are you suggesting?

[Euro_Twins 4,477]

Spot on.

Z cant do anything about it. We do not have a forward in the lineup that can break Gallagher's jaw. But we have a mass of 180 lb forwards doing absilutely nothing offensively. So take your pick of anyone not on Zetterberg's line, and replace him for one game with Tangradi next time Montreal is in town. Then have Tangradi rearrange Gallagher's nose.

We have 4 guys at around 180 pounds. Pulkinen, Miller, nyquist, and Tatar. Wouldn't necessarily call it a mass of them

[kickazz 5,459]

Did I say fighting?

I never said to fight now did I.

I didn't say that's what you said, I asked you what do you want him to do about it? You haven't given a suggestion yet you're saying "then do something about it" as if there is some alternative.

I thought Z's comment was good. He's calling it like it is to the league and Montreal. Pretty bold imo.

Blashill even used a coaches challenge. What else could they have done?

Edited October 18, 2015 by kickazz

[Euro_Twins 4,477]

I didn't say that's what you said, I asked you what do you want him to do about it? You haven't given a suggestion yet you're saying "then do something about it" as if there is some alternative.

I thought Z's comment was good. He's calling it like it is to the league and Montreal. Pretty bold imo.

Blashill even used a coaches challenge. What else could they have done?

Blashill didn't use a coaches challenge though

[kickazz 5,459]

Blashill didn't use a coaches challenge though

Wait realy, i thought the review was challenge?

Heh i guess theres an alternative

Edited October 18, 2015 by kickazz

[Euro_Twins 4,477]

Wait realy, i thought the review was challenge?

Heh i guess theres an alternative

The refs opted for a review. Blashill didn't use his challenge

[kickazz 5,459]

The refs opted for a review. Blashill didn't use his challenge

My mistake, I thought they reviewed because he challenged.

So he didn't need to use his challenge I'm assuming because they decided to review it regardless?

[Echolalia 2,961]

I'm not sure if it was even a reviewable play because Toronto was looking at it already.

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

I'm not sure if it was even a reviewable play because Toronto was looking at it already.

Toronto was doing goalie review. They're not allowed to rule in that context on goaltender interference. If Blashill had then made a challenge they could have then. At least that's how I understand it after the commentary. However, Blash probably didn't know that was the case since the coach's review is so new.

I think Toronto should have just stayed out of the way on this one. They have to have conclusive evidence to override the call on the ice (which was no goal). By saying it wasn't kicked in, they over-ruled the ref's call that was surely more due to the fact that Mrazek wasn't giving the chance to make the stop.

Anyway, it was definitely not a goal. Clear away all the logistics of officiating and the only reason it went in is because Gallagher ploughed Mrazek skate first into the net. Wasn't it just a couple of years ago that the push was to protect goalies after Miller's concussion and other incidents. Can't put up a precedent of rewarding players for situations like this.

[WingsAlways 486]

Gallagher had a chuckle about the goal while speaking with the Montreal Gazette's Pat Hickey...

“I haven’t scored one with my stick yet,” Gallagher said with his trademark smile. “I threw it wide to (Tomas Plekanec) and I beat my guy to the net. They got a stick on it and the puck ended up under my skate. I went down and luckily it went in.”

So did Gallagher, who upended Mrazek. The play was referred to the war room ,which determined the goal was good because there was no kicking motion from Gallagher.

“I thought it was a good goal, but I’m biased,” Gallagher said. “I always think I’m right.”

Smug bastard. This is why I have no respect for the organization or it's fans.

Edited October 18, 2015 by WingsAlways

[frankgrimes 1,836]

Enjoy it Reaves is going to wipe the floor with you and Price come Tuesday.

I hope the Wings remember all that the next time and maybe just maybe play with some hatred and intensity.

[kipwinger 8,527]

I didn't watch this game, just to be clear up front. But from an outsider's perspective, it's hard to believe that our goalie and/or defense are to blame for a game in which we gave up two powerplay, and one empty net, goals.

I see that we were also 0-3 on our own powerplay, so I'm going to go out on a limb and say special teams were probably the difference no?

[Bill Berzeench 310]

I didn't watch this game, just to be clear up front. But from an outsider's perspective, it's hard to believe that our goalie and/or defense are to blame for a game in which we gave up two powerplay, and one empty net, goals.

I see that we were also 0-3 on our own powerplay, so I'm going to go out on a limb and say special teams were probably the difference no?

True. Drew Miller had a very poor game.

[kipwinger 8,527]

Maybe so, I didn't see the game so I don't know which PK unit got scored on. But again, if you only give up 1 even strength goal, you've played a pretty good defensive game.

Also, as I said, we've got to convert on our chances too. You're not going to win many games in which your opponents score on 100% of their powerplay chances and you score on 0% of yours. And that falls on the skill guys. It's easy to blame the third pair defensemen, and fourth liners. Obviously nobody like criticizing Zetterberg and the rest of the stars. But their job is to put pucks in the net, and they didn't.

[joesuffP 1,746]

I didn't watch this game, just to be clear up front. But from an outsider's perspective, it's hard to believe that our goalie and/or defense are to blame for a game in which we gave up two powerplay, and one empty net, goals.

I see that we were also 0-3 on our own powerplay, so I'm going to go out on a limb and say special teams were probably the difference no?

We got outplayed badly and couldn't generate anything offensively. The score was flattering. Same thing against Carolina.. Could not move the puck cleanly through the neutral zone. Canadiens didn't have a ridiculous amount of quality chances but they thoroughly outplayed us, anybody watching could tell they were the much better team

[kipwinger 8,527]

We got outplayed badly and couldn't generate anything offensively. The score was flattering. Same thing against Carolina.. Could not move the puck cleanly through the neutral zone. Canadiens didn't have a ridiculous amount of quality chances but they thoroughly outplayed us, anybody watching could tell they were the much better team

I'm sure they were. But again, if you only give up 1 even strength goal, then defense isn't your problem.

I'm not saying we weren't outplayed. I'm saying that "the defense sux!" or "the goaltending sux!" is just a lazy, default, way of finger pointing. That's pretty clearly not the problem. At least not in those two loses.

[kipwinger 8,527]

One thing I'd definitely do is get Kindl back on the powerplay. His best game in the preseason had him on the PP sideboards (i.e. Ovie's spot) and he scored a goal, hit a post, and had another waived off. That's promising. He's always had a good shot, so I'd like to see that utilized on the pp.

The PK is too early to tell. It was really good for the first 4 games and then stunk in the 5th. So maybe they just had a bad game and need to tighten up. But I'd be monitoring.

Also, I think that as soon as we get the second and third lines figured out our shot totals will go up. We're getting a lot from the top line, and a trickle from everybody else. Getting three balanced lines can't help but increase the total number of shots. For instance, Tatar has 5 shots through 5 games. That's obviously not going to continue all season, his line just isn't gelling right now.

[joesuffP 1,746]

I'm sure they were. But again, if you only give up 1 even strength goal, then defense isn't your problem.

I'm not saying we weren't outplayed. I'm saying that "the defense sux!" or "the goaltending sux!" is just a lazy, default, way of finger pointing. That's pretty clearly not the problem. At least not in those two loses.

I blame our lack of compete.. Causing turnovers, working to get the puck back. But also our puck movement against good defensive teams. When we can't win the battle in the neutral zone we look really bad. I think our dmen aren't good puck movers... Not good enough to break down the neutral zone trap lots of teams use. When we're connecting through the neutral zone we look like the fastest team in the league

[Echolalia 2,961]

I'm sure they were. But again, if you only give up 1 even strength goal, then defense isn't your problem.

I'm not saying we weren't outplayed. I'm saying that "the defense sux!" or "the goaltending sux!" is just a lazy, default, way of finger pointing. That's pretty clearly not the problem. At least not in those two loses.

Seems a little simplistic. The goalie could play excellent and bail out a shaky defense, as we've seen here from time to time. Also s***ty 5 on 5 defense is often what leads to having to play on the PK to begin with, so I think its short-sighted to pin a shorthanded goal exclusively on the penalty killing squad without recognizing who's fault it was that the Wings were even shorthanded. In this game the Wings were outshot 41 to 22, and were shorthanded 5 times. Defense didn't look good 5 on 5. It didn't look good 5 on 4. Offense didn't look good 5 on 5. Offense didn't look good 5 on 4. Transition game didnt look good. Defense wasn't the only reason the Wings lost. But their poor game definitely played a part, 5 on 5 or otherwise.

[kipwinger 8,527]

Seems a little simplistic. The goalie could play excellent and bail out a shaky defense, as we've seen here from time to time. Also s***ty 5 on 5 defense is often what leads to having to play on the PK to begin with, so I think its short-sighted to pin a shorthanded goal exclusively on the penalty killing squad without recognizing who's fault it was that the Wings were even shorthanded. In this game the Wings were outshot 41 to 22, and were shorthanded 5 times. Defense didn't look good 5 on 5. It didn't look good 5 on 4. Offense didn't look good 5 on 5. Offense didn't look good 5 on 4. Transition game didnt look good. Defense wasn't the only reason the Wings lost. But their poor game definitely played a part, 5 on 5 or otherwise.

The top three most penalized players on the Wings team are offensive players. 8 of the top ten are offensive players. Our defense has literally taken 3 penalties all season. Our offense has taken 13.

So aside from the fact that we're not getting scored on much (at even strength), our defense is also not taking a ton of penalties.

But his just further illustrates my point. No matter how good the defense players, people will find some way to inflate their culpability in our loses. Our defense is pretty good. At least so far. Not only are they hardly our "biggest" problem. They're hardly a problem at all.

[joesuffP 1,746]

What criteria for defense makes you think our roster is pretty good... Bad puck movers (aside from Green), zero offensive talent (aside from Green) and not good in their own zone

Green has been our best defender. The last two dmen that have stepped on this team Green and DD, have been our best defenders. It might not show that they're so great but actually how bad our defense actually is

[Echolalia 2,961]

The top three most penalized players on the Wings team are offensive players. 8 of the top ten are offensive players. Our defense has literally taken 3 penalties all season. Our offense has taken 13.

So aside from the fact that we're not getting scored on much (at even strength), our defense is also not taking a ton of penalties.

But his just further illustrates my point. No matter how good the defense players, people will find some way to inflate their culpability in our loses. Our defense is pretty good. At least so far. Not only are they hardly our "biggest" problem. They're hardly a problem at all.

Defense is not limited to just defensman. When the Wings are defending an attack or rush, I'm hoping that all five people on the ice are playing defense. And in that scenario, if an offensive player takes a penalty, its still a defenive penalty.

If you're satisfied in evaluating our defense exclusively on even strength goals against (without even seeing the game for that matter), then by all means continue to do so, but that's an incredibly dangerous game to play, not to mention a very narrow view of their performance, especially in a 5 game total sample size. What happened to bitching about our defenseman's first pass out, or inability to skate out of danger that you were so enthusiastic about last year? Those things are noticibly worse this year, yet all of a sudden by your standard our defense is not an issue, and they've been pretty good so far.

[kipwinger 8,527]

Defense is not limited to just defensman. When the Wings are defending an attack or rush, I'm hoping that all five people on the ice are playing defense. And in that scenario, if an offensive player takes a penalty, its still a defenive penalty.

If you're satisfied in evaluating our defense exclusively on even strength goals against (without even seeing the game for that matter), then by all means continue to do so, but that's an incredibly dangerous game to play, not to mention a very narrow view of their performance, especially in a 5 game total sample size. What happened to bitching about our defenseman's first pass out, or inability to skate out of danger that you were so enthusiastic about last year? Those things are noticibly worse this year, yet all of a sudden by your standard our defense is not an issue, and they've been pretty good so far.

Yep. By my standard our defense has been pretty good so far. As evidenced by the fact that we're among the ten teams who have been scored on the least.

But you're changing the argument. I was just saying that our goalie, and defensemen have played well through 5 games. Which they have. Not that they can't be better, or that they're a quantum leap above last year's team. Our defenseman haven't taken many penalties and haven't gotten scored on much. Can they be better? Sure. But this tendency to blame every loss on the defense is bullcrap.

No you're saying "well, the defenseman might not be that bad, but that's not REALLY defense. The whole team is defense, and in that regard they've sucked". Which still isn't true.

Our team isn't getting scored on much. Plain and simple. Whether you're referring to the defensemen exclusively, or the defenseman + the defensive aspects of the fowards' game, or all of the above plus the goalies.

We're just not getting scored on much.

Could we be better offensively? Absolutely. How? By scoring on the powerplay (for one thing). Something I said a half a page ago.

Edited October 19, 2015 by kipwinger

[Bill Berzeench 310]

Here's how i see the D:

__________(1A) - DeKeyser (1B)

__________(1B) - Kronwall (2B)

Green (3A) - Quincey (3B)

Smith, Ericsson, Kindl, Marchenko, Ouellet, Jenson, Sproul - all 4A guys to fill in for injuries.

If we want a shut down, legit Defense, we gotta cough up some prospects and roster players to land the 1A and 2A guys. Shea Weber will not come cheap. Larkin will be the starting point for a 1A discussion.

So I think a system evaluation/change may be the better way to go. We are putting a lot of expectations and pressure on the defense.