• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

vladdy16

ECQF Game 1 Post-GDT: at Tampa Bay 3, Red Wings 2

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

IF....IF....we lose on Friday, I'd say it's time to give all of the young guys that we played at times during the regular season but now are refusing the play them, a shot. Significant minutes. Give Tampa a different look, give the young guys a chance to turn this around, and most importantly, get them some playoff experience which will be valuable down the road.

I'm thinking we'll win on Friday, but IF we lose it's time to start getting long term value out of this series. I realize we'd be coming back to home ice, only down 0-2, "lots of hockey left", "it takes 4 games to win a series"', "anything can happen", etc... Although much stranger things have happened, I just don't see this team (the team that was on the ice last night) pulling out of a 0-2 hole to go on and win this series.

I hope like hell we win, but being realistic.

I heard this frequently on the Mantha thread - the theory "well we don't look that good heading into the playoffs, so we should lean on our rookies/younger guys and sacrifice this years success for more experience, because we wont win anyway".

Let me be clear: This is a business before it is a hockey team. Even when you are mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, you still have a responsibility to your coaches, managers, and owners to put an acceptable product on the ice.

If you actually make the playoffs, which is the goal of all 30 teams every October - the only mindset that exists (from top to bottom) is: What tactics can we use that give us the best chance to beat the team we are playing this round, and how can we stick to that gameplan? You take it one game at a time, and give everything you have. There is nothing else. If you don't get that - you wouldn't have made it to the NHL.

If Blashill says to Holland, or Holland says to Illitch: "Hey, we lost our first 2 games on the road, so seeing as were coming home now without a "realistic" shot at winning, we think were going to lean on our young guys and bring up another Rookie who cant play Defense, just to give them experience even though we don't think it gives us the best chance to win"... Forget that its Datsyuk's last season and everyone should be giving their left leg to get him another ring, or that every home game brings in close to $5,000,000 in additional revenue:

They are simply no longer an employee of the Detroit Red Wings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zetterberg, talent wise, is where Yzerman was in his last few years. Difference is, Yzerman wasn't on the top line and we had Datsyuk and Zetterberg as young stars carrying the load. This team has no young stars so we keep Zetterberg on the top line role when he clearly shouldn't be there. It's sad to watch the decline of a player and the decline of an organization that doesn't have a future lined up.

Exactly. Thank you for an objective assessment.

Although they do have future players - they simply aren't good enough yet. Whereas in Yzerman's case - D and Z were already the best players in the league.

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard this frequently on the Mantha thread - the theory "well we don't look that good heading into the playoffs, so we should lean on our rookies/younger guys and sacrifice this years success for more experience, because we wont win anyway".

Let me be clear: This is a business before it is a hockey team. Even when you are mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, you still have a responsibility to your coaches, managers, and owners to put an acceptable product on the ice.

If you actually make the playoffs, which is the goal of all 30 teams every October - the only mindset that exists (from top to bottom) is: What tactics can we use that give us the best chance to beat the team we are playing this round, and how can we stick to that gameplan? You take it one game at a time, and give everything you have. There is nothing else. If you don't get that - you wouldn't have made it to the NHL.

If Blashill says to Holland, or Holland says to Illitch: "Hey, we lost our first 2 games on the road, so seeing as were coming home now without a "realistic" shot at winning, we think were going to lean on our young guys and bring up another Rookie who cant play Defense, just to give them experience even though we don't think it gives us the best chance to win"... Forget that its Datsyuk's last season and everyone should be giving their left leg to get him another ring, or that every home game brings in close to $5,000,000 in additional revenue:

They are simply no longer an employee of the Detroit Red Wings.

Exactly. Thank you for an objective assessment.

Although they do have future players - they simply aren't good enough yet. Whereas in Yzerman's case - D and Z were already the best players in the league.

You are right of course. And there is where we are at and what we see on the ice, doesn't take a hockey genius. I guess we have to take it for what it is. We have one hand tied behind our back due to the draft and cap salary.

Like bugs bunny having already ran over the cliff and only now is father time and gravity catching us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right of course. And there is where we are at and what we see on the ice, doesn't take a hockey genius. I guess we have to take it for what it is. We have one hand tied behind our back due to the draft and cap salary.

Like bugs bunny having already ran over the cliff and only now is father time and gravity catching us.

If that bolded sentence were true then a lot of the laughable comments by some folks in their assessment makes me wonder.

2w1w8t5.jpg

Lolllll. Now now Z did glove punch Crosby in the face once so I give him a bit more points than Semin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honest question:

Are you guys happier after Game 1 from last night or last year?

If you think this a trick question, keep in mind - even though we won, we got out shot 46-14 in game 1 of last year and got blown out in Game 2. If we can get some goaltending, we should be ok.

Edited by WingedWheel91

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honest question:

Are you guys happier after Game 1 from last night or last year?

If you think this a trick question, keep in mind - even though we won, we got out shot 46-14 in game 1 of last year and got blown out in Game 2. If we can get some goaltending, we should be ok.

Good question.. It was too long ago for me to know for sure, but I'd probably say last year, but not by much. A wins a win.

That said, I don't think goaltending was the problem. If we had better play right in front of our own net and didn't let guys just stand there, two of their three goals probably don't happen..

That and our breakout in the third period were the two biggest problems in that game, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll evade the question for now.

Just watched Jon Coopers post game interview session after game 1. I watched all his from last year when we faced them. He's much more relaxed, assertive and confident this year. I don't like it. Gotta crash their goalie or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll evade the question for now.

Just watched Jon Coopers post game interview session after game 1. I watched all his from last year when we faced them. He's much more relaxed, assertive and confident this year. I don't like it. Gotta crash their goalie or something.

Nah perimeter shots on net are fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honest question:

Are you guys happier after Game 1 from last night or last year?

This year.

We have a tendency to win game 1s and then blow it. So maybe this time it's the opposite. A part of me was hoping for a loss.

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right of course. And there is where we are at and what we see on the ice, doesn't take a hockey genius . I guess we have to take it for what it is. We have one hand tied behind our back due to the draft and cap salary.

Like bugs bunny having already ran over the cliff and only now is father time and gravity catching us.

Let's poll the math freaks.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited by DatsyukianDekes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honest question:

Are you guys happier after Game 1 from last night or last year?

If you think this a trick question, keep in mind - even though we won, we got out shot 46-14 in game 1 of last year and got blown out in Game 2. If we can get some goaltending, we should be ok.

I'm happier with last night. If it wasn't for Mrazek last year they would have lost badly. At least this year the play was a lot closer. If the Wings had buried all those missed opportunities and open nets, they would have won.

Edited by chaps80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

D doesn't really have a leader. You can say Kronwall but you have to play like a leader to be a leader. Would really like to see Smith in for Ericsson. Just seems like they are so much slower when he's on the ice. Tampa is a fast team, you have to match it with skating ability. Smith > Ericsson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

D doesn't really have a leader. You can say Kronwall but you have to play like a leader to be a leader. Would really like to see Smith in for Ericsson. Just seems like they are so much slower when he's on the ice. Tampa is a fast team, you have to match it with skating ability. Smith > Ericsson

Ya I agree with this, plus smith adds a more nasty presence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.