• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Bill Berzeench

The Killer Instict

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

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.

Yep. +1 on that. I've stated in the past that we should trade for excellent veteran d-men and let the forwards come from the Griffins. They are simply too rare to get from the "soldier ranks".

Imagine having Hedman (Tampa bay). Complete, young d-man. At 30, he's gonna dominate like Lidsy did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Not directed at your comment specifically, but I hear this thrown around a lot. I agree, but realistically how do you prepare your team to lose one of (if not the best) defensemen to ever play the game? Yes, you can go out and sign a Shea Weber, but that's still going to fall short, especially when OTHER players on your team that you thought were pretty decent are exposed as mediocre in his absence. We didn't just lose Lids, we "lost" everyone on the team that he elevated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not directed at your comment specifically, but I hear this thrown around a lot. I agree, but realistically how do you prepare your team to lose one of (if not the best) defensemen to ever play the game? Yes, you can go out and sign a Shea Weber, but that's still going to fall short, especially when OTHER players on your team that you thought were pretty decent are exposed as mediocre in his absence. We didn't just lose Lids, we "lost" everyone on the team that he elevated.

Excellent post! Its frustrating when people say Holland didn't prepare for the loss off Lidstrom, because you just cant. His best replacement at the time was Kronwall. With that being said, if I remember correctly he did try making a play for Weber, but either Weber or Nashville were not interested (around the time Weber signed the offer sheet with Philly), and we all know how hard he tried with Suter, Elite d-men are elite for a reason, they are not easy to find. In the days of the cap and long term contracts with top players usually resigning with their existing teams, its even harder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Losing Lidstrom definitely hurt this team, and it might have been the cause of the slide since then, but I don't think we use it as an excuse for why the team is struggling in the third period. There are 29 teams that never had a Lidstrom to begin with, and now 30 teams that don't. Most of them have no issue closing out games, and certainly not to the degree that the Wings do. So there's definitely a way to do it without requiring a Lidstrom-level skillset on the defensive roster. Some team's have players of Weber' caliber, or Suter's caliber, but there's also many teams out there with defensman that aren't any better than the what the Wings have who can maintain a lead throughout the third period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Just to add to what BoS and kliq said, there was always going to be a dip after Lidstrom retired, but on top of that, we had a number of other unexpected hits to the D corps. Rafalski retired out of the blue, Stuart asked for a trade for family reasons. That's 3 of our top 4 at the time gone in a couple of years. I think Kenny has done a good job rebuilding with these hits to the roster.

And he did prepare for Lidstrom's retirement. People forget that we had Jiri FIscher. Fischer would still be playing (he's 35) and would have been in the top 4 for this adjustment period after Lidstrom. Just imagine the past few years with that 6' 5", first round defensive stalwart in the mix. I don't think Holland can be blamed for not accounting for a heart problem. On top of him, we used other 1st round draft picks for Dmen that just didn't develop to their high potential (Kindl, Smith).

Edited by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add to what BoS and kliq said, there was always going to be a dip after Lidstrom retired, but on top of that, we had a number of other unexpected hits to the D corps. Rafalski retired out of the blue, Stuart asked for a trade for family reasons. That's 3 of our top 4 at the time gone in a couple of years. I think Kenny has done a good job rebuilding with these hits to the roster.

And he did prepare for Lidstrom's retirement. People forget that we had Jiri FIscher. Fischer would still be playing (he's 35) and would have been in the top 4 for this adjustment period after Lidstrom. Just imagine the past few years with that 6' 5", first round defensive stalwart in the mix. I don't think Holland can be blamed for not accounting for a heart problem. On top of him, we used other 1st round draft picks for Dmen that just didn't develop to their high potential (Kindl, Smith).

Good points. Smith and Kindl should be there by now. They need to get to the next level this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've wondered if Kindl and DD would make a good pairing? Kindl is one of our best offensive dmen and he's sitting in the press box when our offense stinks. I think he deserves another shot even though nobody on defense has played particularly bad. Nobody is playing unbelievable either

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've wondered if Kindl and DD would make a good pairing? Kindl is one of our best offensive dmen and he's sitting in the press box when our offense stinks. I think he deserves another shot even though nobody on defense has played particularly bad. Nobody is playing unbelievable either

I like Kindl. He just needs to get an aggressive side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

And I do think it's knee jerk considering this thread, and most of the opinions herein, didn't spring up while we were regularly beating good teams. Nobody was rushing around to talk about all the changes we needed to make when we were busy beating Montreal in regulation. But lose two games and here we go. Look back through the GDT's and see how many people were saying "I know we're scoring goals, winning games, and even getting points in our loses...but dammit we need roster changes".

They weren't.

But I'll give you one thing. Our win percentage when leading after two periods IS low. So low, in fact, that I'd argue its an anomaly. So low that its almost a freak thing. So low that MUCH worse rosters aren't even comparably bad. And as such, it's probably not something a roster change is going to fix.

THIS is a mental thing. And probably a usage thing as well. Changing around bodies for depth players, who probably aren't going to be on the ice late in games anyway, isn't going to address the issue.

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I do think it's knee jerk considering this thread, and most of the opinions herein, didn't spring up while we were regularly beating good teams. Nobody was rushing around to talk about all the changes we needed to make when we were busy beating Montreal in regulation. But lose two games and here we go. Look back through the GDT's and see how many people were saying "I know we're scoring goals, winning games, and even getting points in our loses...but dammit we need roster changes".

They weren't.

But I'll give you one thing. Our win percentage when leading after two periods IS low. So low, in fact, that I'd argue its an anomaly. So low that its almost a freak thing. So low that MUCH worse rosters aren't even comparably bad. And as such, it's probably not something a roster change is going to fix.

THIS is a mental thing. And probably a usage thing as well. Changing around bodies for depth players, who probably aren't going to be on the ice late in games anyway, isn't going to address the issue.

I'm not suggesting that changing the roster up is the solution. The changes I want to see are with how Blashill is instructing the team to play in the final ten minutes. Seems like the OP and most other posters are thinking the same thing. So I'm not sure where that's coming from. Leftwinger mentioned adding some new bodies, but he does that in every thread. Your coment could have been directed specifically at JoesuffP, which would make more sense cuz he seemed to be interested in adding bodies. Sometimes it's hard to tell without quote function, so excuse me if that's the case. But then I don't get why you would respond to me like I was the one suggesting changing the roster up, or that it was even the majority opinion here.

But I disagree that people's view on the matter has just now popped up after these two games. Just about every GDT where the wings have blown a lead is full of comments of disgust and trying to point the blame and various opinions of what should be done, at least to the extent that the mods allow before it's considered off-topic. Now, after 11 blown leads, someone finally decided to have an official thread to discuss the issue. Again, that doesn't seem knee-jerk to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not suggesting that changing the roster up is the solution. The changes I want to see are with how Blashill is instructing the team to play in the final ten minutes. Seems like the OP and most other posters are thinking the same thing. So I'm not sure where that's coming from. Leftwinger mentioned adding some new bodies, but he does that in every thread. Your coment could have been directed specifically at JoesuffP, which would make more sense cuz he seemed to be interested in adding bodies. Sometimes it's hard to tell without quote function, so excuse me if that's the case. But then I don't get why you would respond to me like I was the one suggesting changing the roster up, or that it was even the majority opinion here.

But I disagree that people's view on the matter has just now popped up after these two games. Just about every GDT where the wings have blown a lead is full of comments of disgust and trying to point the blame and various opinions of what should be done, at least to the extent that the mods allow before it's considered off-topic. Now, after 11 blown leads, someone finally decided to have an official thread to discuss the issue. Again, that doesn't seem knee-jerk to me.

Exactly. I've been talking about it since I came aboard here. It's probably one of the things that frustrate me the most. It needs to be addressed. The coughed up points make the difference in 5 vs 3 or 8 vs 1 in the playoffs. That difference turns into the difference of playing a number 1 seed that's banged up in the 2nd round versus a fresh #1 seed in the first round. These points matter. The problem needs to become less of a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the team is making a conscious effort not to try and score goals in the third period this team is just offensively challenged. Imo with the type of players we have we should be scoring more goals one way or another. Are shot totals are dwindling down to where we were to start the season as well. We're approaching the halfway junction of the season we're more likely to be in the bottom third of scoring compared to rising to the top third

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not suggesting that changing the roster up is the solution. The changes I want to see are with how Blashill is instructing the team to play in the final ten minutes. Seems like the OP and most other posters are thinking the same thing. So I'm not sure where that's coming from. Leftwinger mentioned adding some new bodies, but he does that in every thread. Your coment could have been directed specifically at JoesuffP, which would make more sense cuz he seemed to be interested in adding bodies. Sometimes it's hard to tell without quote function, so excuse me if that's the case. But then I don't get why you would respond to me like I was the one suggesting changing the roster up, or that it was even the majority opinion here.

But I disagree that people's view on the matter has just now popped up after these two games. Just about every GDT where the wings have blown a lead is full of comments of disgust and trying to point the blame and various opinions of what should be done, at least to the extent that the mods allow before it's considered off-topic. Now, after 11 blown leads, someone finally decided to have an official thread to discuss the issue. Again, that doesn't seem knee-jerk to me.

You're right, I should have used quotes as I wasn't (originally) responding exclusively to you. I responded to you after you responded to me with the numbers on our winning percentage after leading two periods...and here we are. I don't always make an effort to use quotes when responding to what I consider general attitudes. Its a weakness.

But you hit on something I do agree with, and have stated in this thread. Which is usage. Probably, and this is just a theory, Blashill is still learning how to coach this team at this level. And is realizing (and hopefully adjusting to the fact that) leads are harder to hold in the NHL than the AHL. That he can't lay back and protect leads like he is accustomed to because everyone is too good at this level. So he's got to figure how who to use, and when, in order to stay aggressive enough to keep the pressure on in the third without giving up chances.

And that will probably take a little time. But I'd be really surprised if our winning percentage after leading two is as bad in march as it is now...even without noticeable changes otherwise. We are still figuring out who this team is and how good they can be. We are good, but not perfect. And our issues (usage and power play mostly) are likely an issue of making adjustments. IF, once we get that sorted out, we still struggle then I'd be willing to consider more substantial changes. But not until we know what we have.

I'm just not on board with any of this "we need a number one defenseman", "we need to get bigger", "we lost Lindstrom", "we need a killer instinct", stuff. Which is what I was responding to. And those comments I consider knee jerk.

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kip, I agree with most of what you're saying and I do believe that this is still a little premature. People still seem to forget that we are STILL in somewhat of a rebuilding phase. This is the youngest team we've had in forever and we're going to continue to get younger over the next few years. There are going to continue to be some growing pains. However, I truly do believe that in a year or two, without making any trades, just continue to develop the homegrown talent, this team will be at the top once again.

The one thing I will disagree with though is the notion that Blashill is accustomed to laying back to protect leads. He's never resorted to a defensive shut em down style of hockey. Even when he coached in the American League he always stressed going after them. Don't sit back, go get the next goal type of mentality, whether his team was down by a goal, up by a goal or up by 3... That's what I've always liked about him and one of the reasons I was so excited to see what he could do with the Wings this season. I do believe he still has that same sort of mentality, it's just taking a little longer for the whole team to buy in. I think they'll get there, and when they do, look out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right, I should have used quotes as I wasn't (originally) responding exclusively to you. I responded to you after you responded to me with the numbers on our winning percentage after leading two periods...and here we are. I don't always make an effort to use quotes when responding to what I consider general attitudes. Its a weakness.

But you hit on something I do agree with, and have stated in this thread. Which is usage. Probably, and this is just a theory, Blashill is still learning how to coach this team at this level. And is realizing (and hopefully adjusting to the fact that) leads are harder to hold in the NHL than the AHL. That he can't lay back and protect leads like he is accustomed to because everyone is too good at this level. So he's got to figure how who to use, and when, in order to stay aggressive enough to keep the pressure on in the third without giving up chances.

And that will probably take a little time. But I'd be really surprised if our winning percentage after leading two is as bad in march as it is now...even without noticeable changes otherwise. We are still figuring out who this team is and how good they can be. We are good, but not perfect. And our issues (usage and power play mostly) are likely an issue of making adjustments. IF, once we get that sorted out, we still struggle then I'd be willing to consider more substantial changes. But not until we know what we have.

I'm just not on board with any of this "we need a number one defenseman", "we need to get bigger", "we lost Lindstrom", "we need a killer instinct", stuff. Which is what I was responding to. And those comments I consider knee jerk.

Fair enough, and I agree with everything here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been looking at the numbers behind this, trying to figure out what's going wrong. The biggest thing that stands out so far is nothing stands out. Statistically, it doesn't look like there is any formula for success. Sure, we have a terrible shooting% when we have a 3rd period lead, but Minnesota isn't much better and they're 11-0-1. Florida has the best sh% in the league, and they're 10-2-2, not much better than us.

We're not sitting back as people seem to think. We maintain our shot rate much better than the league average. Every team in the league shoots less when they have a lead in the 3rd period (data from the 12-13 season through this year as of a few days ago, may not be true if looking at just this year), and allows more shots against. Literally every team. Analytics sites even give score-adjusted shot metrics to account for it. On average, the league shoots 82% as often when they have the lead as opposed to all situations. Wings are at 89%, 95% when up by one as opposed to 84% league average. Both marks are among the best in the league. Shots against also increase less than average, though not by as much. But neither of those seem to be a factor, as there are both good and bad teams at both ends of the spectrum.

Teams that have done well at protecting leads tend to be slightly above average teams, but in terms of how they play with the lead relative to in all situations, they conform almost perfectly to league averages. (And though I didn't actually do the full comparison, I suspect it's the same for the poor teams.)

My conclusion is that's there's just so many close games, where literally one mistake can be the difference between a win and a loss (or at least OT), that's it's not something that can be measured with current data. Nothing seems to be wrong systemically, nor is there any roster deficiency that can be noted. I can't find player usage data specific to 3rd periods, but usage doesn't change much when leading overall, so I doubt it would change by too much late in games (a little more than 40% of our total lead time was in the 3rd period, so if there was a difference it would be visible I think).

I have to say it's just a case of a few too many mistakes at crucial times. Call it killer instinct or clutch-ness or intangibles or whatever, it's just something we seem to lack. Costs us a bit over 3 points a year over average, almost 6 compared to the good teams. Can make a big difference in seeding or even be the difference between making the playoffs or missing. So far, this year is looking worse, but it's early still. Unfortunately, being that it's so difficult to define, it'll be difficult to correct. I doubt we can single out any players that are particularly good or bad. "Get better overall" is probably the easiest way to go. At least if that doesn't correct the problem, it should lessen the impact. Maybe look to swap some of our replaceable players with similar or better players from teams that have been good at holding leads (like the Rangers...94-1-3).

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