Bill Berzeench 310 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 For too many years in a row now, the Red Wings have not been able to slam the door on teams in the third period. They seem to have a hide-in-the-shell turtle mentality when the clock hits 10 minutes to go in the third and they have a lead. This has to be a coaching problem. I'm disturbed that Jeff Blashill has carried on this bad habit since Babcock's departure. So how do the Red Wings get rid of this mentality and start producing 3 and 4 goal leads in the third period instead of setting a self destruct time bomb for themselves and being content to only protect their lead? I really believe it's a psychological/coaching problem. It can't be that the players aren't physically fit enough to last 60 minutes and fatigue causes them to give up leads. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Echolalia 2,961 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 (edited) I understand the theory behind playing super defensive in the last ten minutes of a game where you hold a lead, but I have long questioned the effectiveness of it. When playing from behind, other teams start taking more chances, activate their defensmen, pinch deeper, forecheck with two guys when normally they'd go with one, three guys when they'd normally go with two, etc etc etc. So in theory, it makes sense to play super defensive, positionally sound hockey to prevent any situations where the other team gets a glorious scoring chance in the slot. But in practice (at least in Babcock and Blashill's case) it just hasn't worked. I think the Wings are playing their best defensive hockey when the puck is in the other end of the ice, on our sticks, and that means strong forecheck, good speed, and aggressive hockey to pin the opposition in their own zone. At least for a few games, I would like to see whether that yields better results against a team who is down by one or two goals with 10 minutes left, even if in theory it makes more sense to play conservative. At the very worst we see more of the same: blown leads. But maybe teams that were beat with fast, aggressive hockey for 50 minutes will continue to be stymied by it for 10 more minutes, even if they do take more chances. I honestly don't know. But I would love to find out. Edited December 16, 2015 by Echolalia Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chaps80 1,591 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 Pretty sure Blashill realizes the problem. It's his first year coaching a team where the core have only ever played under Babcock,or Lewis for a couple years early in their careers (Dats played his rookie year under Bowman). They honestly are'nt doing bad overall, but ya, the third period collapses are getting annoying. Blashill will fix it eventually i'm sure. It just takes time to get guys used to a different system when Babs had them go into a defensive she'll in the third whenever they had a lead, and did it for years. 2 krsmith17 and Gordie Howe hat trick reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 I agree chaps. From what I've seen from the Griffins over the past few seasons, it never seemed like it was in their game plan to sit back and try to protect leads, they always seemed to want to go out and get the next one whether it was a 2-1 game or 5-1 game. I'm sure Blashill is well aware that changes need to be made and is working diligently to implement that same mentality of his Griffins teams into the Wings system. It takes time, especially like you mentioned, the majority of the team has been coached by the same guy virtually their entire NHL career, be it two years or ten years. It's very easy to learn and understand new systems, it's a lot harder to execute these new systems without ever reverting back to the old system... There have been way too many blown leads of late and that last game really got under my skin, but this team is definitely trending in the right direction, and I have faith in Blashill and the players that they'll get it figured out sooner than later. I believe we're definitely in the mix this year, but still feel that we're either one or two moves or one or two years away from being a legit threat. At this point I'm not sure which I'd prefer, actually go out and get one or two big pieces that would help us now (and in the future - enough with the rentals), giving up some assets (players, prospects, picks). Or continue to develop the youth and wait another year or two and hope to have an extremely potent home grown team in a couple years time. Their are obvious pros and cons to both strategies but I'm thinking Holland will elect to continue to play it safe and go with the latter, which me personally, I'm fine with... 1 chaps80 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 Prevent defenses tend to do nothing more than prevent you from winning Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bill Berzeench 310 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 I agree chaps. From what I've seen from the Griffins over the past few seasons, it never seemed like it was in their game plan to sit back and try to protect leads, they always seemed to want to go out and get the next one whether it was a 2-1 game or 5-1 game. I'm sure Blashill is well aware that changes need to be made and is working diligently to implement that same mentality of his Griffins teams into the Wings system. It takes time, especially like you mentioned, the majority of the team has been coached by the same guy virtually their entire NHL career, be it two years or ten years. It's very easy to learn and understand new systems, it's a lot harder to execute these new systems without ever reverting back to the old system... There have been way too many blown leads of late and that last game really got under my skin, but this team is definitely trending in the right direction, and I have faith in Blashill and the players that they'll get it figured out sooner than later. I believe we're definitely in the mix this year, but still feel that we're either one or two moves or one or two years away from being a legit threat. At this point I'm not sure which I'd prefer, actually go out and get one or two big pieces that would help us now (and in the future - enough with the rentals), giving up some assets (players, prospects, picks). Or continue to develop the youth and wait another year or two and hope to have an extremely potent home grown team in a couple years time. Their are obvious pros and cons to both strategies but I'm thinking Holland will elect to continue to play it safe and go with the latter, which me personally, I'm fine with... Hmmmm, dont know if I agree. We are about to lose 2 premier 2 way forwards to retirement or to age and wear and tear. Im thinking Dats and Z got this year and maybe 1 more to be at the level that will allow us to win in the playoffs. Gotta find a couple more Larkin type guys. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joesuffP 1,746 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 (edited) Goals are just so hard to come by for this team (unless we're plying the coyotes) Sabres looked like a defensive juggernaut against us and that's one of the worst defensive teams in the league. We just can't battle for rebounds or second chances. When we were firing on all cylinders (for about 4 games) everyone was working hard. Now you watch the TSN line and if Sheahan isn't digging the puck out doing all the work then it's 1 and done everytime. That kind of effort just isn't sustainable because we're small and weak. We need more Sheahan's to compliment them. We just throw a lineup together that's individually skilled but don't work well together Edited December 16, 2015 by joesuffP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bill Berzeench 310 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 Goals are just so hard to come by for this team (unless we're plying the coyotes) Sabres looked like a defensive juggernaut against us and that's one of the worst defensive teams in the league. We just can't battle for rebounds or second chances. When we were firing on all cylinders (for about 4 games) everyone was working hard. Now you watch the TSN line and if Sheahan isn't digging the puck out doing all the work then it's 1 and done everytime. That kind of effort just isn't sustainable because we're small and weak. We need more Sheahan's to compliment them. We just throw a lineup together that's individually skilled but don't work well together Good points. We do need Tatar to add 10 lbs and Nyquist to add 20 lbs. These guys get beat along the boards every time. Sustained pressure is a big factor in tiring the other team, drawing penalties, and scoring goals. How does the coach get the team to achieve this for the last 10 minutes of the 3rd period? Seems like we shyte the bed way too often. I almost feel like we need to pick up the mentality that we start each game down 2-0. We need to play like we are down a goal when we are up a goal, and play like we are tied when we are up 2 goals. Right now, we play like we are tied when we are down a goal, tied, or up a goal. That needs to change. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joesuffP 1,746 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 I mean the difference between winning these 3rd period blown games and OT is very small but being what we are to elite is going to take a lot of work. Adding size and strength being a big part 1 LeftWinger reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 4,915 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 We have to get bigger. I don't mean big like height, but we need a player or two that plays big. We all know E has size, but he pays like he's 5'9". We need a player who plays 6'5". Whether he actually be 6'5 or if he is 6' and plays bigger, we need him now. Everyone is tired of hearing trade scenarios or players that can be traded, but its time, we went from winning ROW's to losing OT, to losing. It was a slow pregression, but it got there. It's time for Holland to make that deal that gets us the top line defender (if one is available) and/or a bigtime legit scoring threat. I still maintain that E, Smith, K, Helm, Andersson, Jurco, Pulkkinen and Howard are ALL expendable/replaceable, and I am a fan of Jurco and Pulk, but any of these guys can be replaced within the system or with whomever is acqured. Throw the 1st round pick out there and a prospect or two in order to get what we need. Of our 4 D kids, we aren't going to be able to keep all of them, there's just no room, especially if we get that top guy in a trade, so throw one of them in a deal. I know the goalie tandem is doing fine, but trade Howard now while he still has #1 value. It's time for Mrazek to take over playing 8 out of 10 games now. We cannot just sit back anymore and hope things turn for the better, they have gotten worse. The only reason we are anywhere near MTL is because Price is hurt. I suppose if things don't get any worse, we could wait until the deadline, but I really wish they wouldn't, they seem to be going downhill a bit, I hope they trend up very soon. I don't know what it would take to get that #1 defenseman, but I am sure, even with the names I listed, Holland could offer a package of any combo of them and get what he needs. 1 Learn2LuvIt reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Learn2LuvIt 245 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 We have to get bigger. I don't mean big like height, but we need a player or two that plays big. We all know E has size, but he pays like he's 5'9". We need a player who plays 6'5". Whether he actually be 6'5 or if he is 6' and plays bigger, we need him now. Totally agree. I look at a guy like Bryan Bickell who played a HUGE, important role for Chicago during their recent successes/cup wins. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pondrocket 35 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 IMO this is a team that has some skill and has a little speed but don't play like they believe they are more than an above average team. With the D we have & an overall lack of strength in the corners how could they think otherwise? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,458 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 Everybody should chill a bit. A week ago we played super well against two of the very best teams in the league. This week we had a couple stinkers. Oh well. It happens. We aren't a perfect team, but we are competitive with the best teams in the league. Playing two bad games in a row (we got a point in one) is not a sign that we need some dramatic change in our roster or approach. I've said all along, and still maintain, we will be a MUCH better team in the second half of the season than the first. Growing pains happen. We will continue to improve, make some tweaks at the deadline, and be in prime territory come playoffs. Mark it. 6 chaps80, NerveDamage, MrazekFanBoy and 3 others reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WingsallTheway 383 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 Prevent defenses tend to do nothing more than prevent you from winning I agree. Its the same thing in football, you just make it easier to gain small yardage until an easy touchdown inevitably happens Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joesuffP 1,746 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 (edited) if we don't make any changes then I see us finishing the same way we have the last three years. Scrape into the playoffs and get bounced early. That's all well and good I guess, if the plan is to wait for Mantha, Larkin and Svechnikov to start making real pushes for cups. We got 2-3 years before we sniff serious contender status. We're just lucky our division hasn't improved The way the scoring dries up and inconsistent defense, this is the exact same team the last 3 years but with better goaltending. It's frustrating but at least we haven't thrown all our eggs in the basket and still are struggling like Anaheim Edited December 16, 2015 by joesuffP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,458 Report post Posted December 16, 2015 (edited) I'm not saying we should make no changes. I'm saying we should not make knee jerk changes based on games like the last two while forgetting about how good we have looked against teams like Los Angeles, Washington, St. Louis, and Montreal. Also, I disagree that we are the same team as the last three years. Aside from the internal growth of guys like Tatar, Nyquist, and Dekeyser, we also added Green, Richards, and Larkin. We are a MUCH better team than we were a year go. And we will continue to play better as we work out the growing pains (I.e. the power play, defense scoring, usage issues, etc.) Edited December 16, 2015 by kipwinger 1 krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wheelchairsuperhero 1,453 Report post Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) Everybody should chill a bit. A week ago we played super well against two of the very best teams in the league. This week we had a couple stinkers. Oh well. It happens. We aren't a perfect team, but we are competitive with the best teams in the league. Playing two bad games in a row (we got a point in one) is not a sign that we need some dramatic change in our roster or approach. I've said all along, and still maintain, we will be a MUCH better team in the second half of the season than the first. Growing pains happen. We will continue to improve, make some tweaks at the deadline, and be in prime territory come playoffs. Mark it. These have basically been my thoughts as well. I've said it a few times now, but I believe the team is trending upwards, despite these last two losses. Edited December 17, 2015 by Wheelchairsuperhero 1 krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chaps80 1,591 Report post Posted December 17, 2015 Even if they don't make the playoffs,(I think they will, but they won't last long unless some things change), is that really such a bad thing? If we can't contend for the cup, then what's the point really? Because of the streak? Big deal. We'll end up higher in the draft, and maybe it will push Holland to get the players we really need. Also, Babcock is gone. There's no reason not to sign some guys who bring a physical presence to the team for next season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Echolalia 2,961 Report post Posted December 17, 2015 I'm not saying we should make no changes. I'm saying we should not make knee jerk changes based on games like the last two while forgetting about how good we have looked against teams like Los Angeles, Washington, St. Louis, and Montreal. Also, I disagree that we are the same team as the last three years. Aside from the internal growth of guys like Tatar, Nyquist, and Dekeyser, we also added Green, Richards, and Larkin. We are a MUCH better team than we were a year go. And we will continue to play better as we work out the growing pains (I.e. the power play, defense scoring, usage issues, etc.) I don't think its a knee-jerk reaction based off the last two games. The Wings have blown 11 third period leads over the course of the season so far. Our win percentage when leading after 2 periods is .625, which is second worst in the league, and that isn't trending up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joesuffP 1,746 Report post Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) We're also 20th in GPG even after a flurry of goal scoring. When we're bad it's because we can't score, we're rarely getting blown out because of our poor defense. A lot of that is because our defense don't contribute very much, which is a problem that I feel can be adjusted by changing strategies slightly. When we were playing our best hockey the defense made a concerted effort to put pucks on net and then they suddenly stop and... We stop scoring. I know some guys are uncomfortable with it but it makes a huge difference. E was actually really good at one-timing the puck for that stretch Edited December 17, 2015 by joesuffP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chaps80 1,591 Report post Posted December 17, 2015 .625??? Lol damnnn that's horrid. Really? .625?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Echolalia 2,961 Report post Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) .625??? Lol damnnn that's horrid. Really? .625?? http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?reportType=season&report=leadingtrailing&season=20152016&gameType=2&sort=winPctgAfterLead2p&aggregate=0 I don't think the team has been playing bad overall. I mean they did just have a 13 game point streak, and are currently second in the division. But they are leaving a lot of points on the table, and perhaps just as importantly giving points to the opposition. If that .625 was the league median .900, that would translate to 4.4 more wins, or roughly 9 extra points, and a handful of points taken away from those teams who came from behind to beat the Wings. 9 extra points puts the Wings just behind Dallas for the league lead (who incidentally wins .933 of their games when leading after two periods). Edit: actually it would be less than 9 points, because some of those wins were converted from OT losses, where the Wings did get a point. So its closer to 5 points. So they'd be with Montreal (with a game in hand). Edited December 17, 2015 by Echolalia 1 Rivalred reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dirtydangles 1,328 Report post Posted December 17, 2015 This is basically the result of Lidstrom retiring. Ever since he hung them up we haven't had luck closing out games in subsequent seasons. We just don't have that stud on the back end that can control everything. This is a problem for a lot of teams - just a newish problem for us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bill Berzeench 310 Report post Posted December 17, 2015 This is basically the result of Lidstrom retiring. Ever since he hung them up we haven't had luck closing out games in subsequent seasons. We just don't have that stud on the back end that can control everything. This is a problem for a lot of teams - just a newish problem for us. Yah. Agreed. By no means am i saying its easy to rectify this problem. I'm just stating that there is a problem. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chaps80 1,591 Report post Posted December 17, 2015 Agreed on Lidstrom as well. Kenny did'nt plan ahead for it, unless he thought Kronwall was going to be wayyy better than he is. He scrambled to try to sign Suter when he realized Lids was really done, leaving a huge defensive hole. And obv that did'nt happen. Rafalski's surprise retirement did'nt help either. I'm sure Kenny thought he'd play a few more years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites