Jump to content

Buppy's Photo


Member Since 14 Feb 2009
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 10:30 PM

#2162417 Reasons why Wings are down 0-2

Posted by Buppy on 01 May 2011 - 04:55 AM

... There may be something to Grypho's theory ...

It's not 'his' theory. It is literally discussed every single time any team has a long layoff in the playoffs, even before the very game we're discussing. I'd say it's even common knowledge. Give a team a week off, they'll probably be a little rusty.

...Many fans described the Wings' Game 1 play using different synonyms for "lethargic" (implying physical limitations), while twice now in this thread that same play was referred to as "passive", which implies a mental state, obviously meant to infer that it was a kind of deliberateness on the parts of the players, and therefore within their control -- like a strategic move, of sorts ("Trying more to 'weather the storm' than increase our lead."). It didn't look that way to me, but if that is true, then I find that very sad for the Wings. If that is true, then Babcock has every reason to be angry at the majority of players on the team (all but, what, three?) for not "deciding" to flip that [purely mental] switch, and for essentially giving the Sharks' defense most of the night off!

Don't be so melodramatic. It's not like the Sharks dominated the entire game. It was a portion of one period. Teams sit back all the time, especially when leading on the road. The home team comes out firing, the road team gets over-cautious...no one wants to be the guy that makes a mistake, or takes a penalty that leads to a tying goal. Every single team in the league does it at times. We got better toward the end of the second and in the third. That wouldn't have been possible if it was all some physical handicap from the layoff, as you seem to think.

The layoff was probably a small factor, mostly for Zetterbarg, who hadn't played in over 3 weeks. Next game it shouldn't really be a factor at all. You're acting like the Wings are doomed and incapable of playing with the Sharks. You weren't half as dominant as you seem to think. You didn't blow us out. You didn't even score during your most dominant stretch.

It was a very close game that could have easily gone either way. A little more luck and the Wings would have won, and there'd probably be a thread here on how much good the layoff did us.

#2162263 Reasons why Wings are down 0-2

Posted by Buppy on 30 April 2011 - 09:02 PM


I hate to detract from all the hard work you put in to patting yourself on the back, but you're kind of stating the obvious here. Everyone already knows that too long of a layoff can have a detrimental effect.

Though I'd say the effect was marginal, no matter how many quotes you picked out of the GDT. Aside from the PPs, which had nothing to so with rustiness, the 3rd period and OT were pretty even. So was the 1st.

I'd say being at home and down by a goal had more to do with the Sharks energy in the 2nd. For our part, I think we were just too passive. Trying too hard to not make mistakes or take penalties. Trying more to 'weather the storm' than increase our lead.

Since we did in fact weather the storm, I'm inclined to say the 2nd period really meant nothing to the game. 1st and 3rd periods were basically even. We scored in one, Sharks scored in the other. The OT goal was a lucky bounce. No need to over analyze anything. Close match between two good teams; the breaks went to the Sharks.

#2151348 2011 Round 1 Photoshop War: Phoenix Coyotes

Posted by Buppy on 16 April 2011 - 10:05 PM

Posted Image
Ok, so I suck at fonts. Sue me.

#2148802 To Red Wings fans in Arizona:

Posted by Buppy on 13 April 2011 - 11:23 PM

My uncle lives outside Phoenix and will be at game 3. In red.

#2148797 2011 Round 1 Photoshop War: Phoenix Coyotes

Posted by Buppy on 13 April 2011 - 11:15 PM

Release the Franzen!! (release the kraken meme)
Someone please, please make this :siren:

Posted Image

Pushing the limits of my meager photoshop skillz...

#2146107 Anyone want to discuss calls/no calls/GI going into the playoffs?

Posted by Buppy on 10 April 2011 - 10:55 PM

I agree with you. The refs just didn't see the call. You know when a ref sees a high stick it is a penalty EVERY TIME. I was listening to the Hawks radio feed while driving through Chicago and the Franzen high stick happened. Even the announcers thought it was Franzen's own stick that caused it. The refs conferred and no one saw it.

Now, if you are advocating that the refs should look at instant replay to determine if there was an infraction, that is a different story. Just make sure you add on about 10-20 minutes of extra time per game for all the instant replays. Then also be ready to see the Wings get nailed for some calls that they otherwise would have gotten away with. I am ok with instant replay being used more often, especially in the cases of high sticking and waived off goals from goalie interference.

Could the games be called more consistently? I do. At the same time though, I do have to agree that the refs are being asked to do an impossible job. Call every game 100% accurately. That just isn't going to happen unless the system changes.

Yeah, yeah, yeah...we get it. You've done some reffing and now you're a ref apologist. I've played some hockey. But I'm not going to excuse every s***ty play because hockey is hard.

No one expects the refs to be perfect. It is a tough job and mistakes will be made. But when a mistake is made people should ***** about it. NHL refs should be the best in the business. They should be striving for perfection. Should always be trying to improve.

If no one complains about the mistakes; if everything is always 'good enough' as you always seem to suggest, there's no incentive for improvement. If you just accept any mistake you remove any responsibility from the refs; then things are only going to get worse.

I don't even blame the refs themselves really. It's mostly the Bettman regime. There doesn't seem to be any expectation of improvement. They refuse to change stupid rules like 'intent to blow'. Goal reviews are wrong half the time. There seems to be a league mandate to make sure all the chinciest s*** gets called at least a few times each game; probably what is distracting the refs from noticing major stuff like blatant high-sticks and elbows. And I don't think anyone, anywhere, really even knows what interference is...or maybe the actual definition does change shift to shift.

...The current system is not a flawed system, ...

...We can both agree on the flawed system. ...

Heh. At least the inconsistency proves that you're a real ref. :hehe:

#2143108 Unbelievably bad goal.

Posted by Buppy on 07 April 2011 - 12:30 AM

Posted Image

After seeing this I'm even more surprised that this was ruled a goal on the ice. How is that ref anywhere near a good position to say that puck was in?

#2140183 Coyotes or Thrashers to Winnipeg

Posted by Buppy on 02 April 2011 - 11:46 AM

If Atlanta moved to Winnipeg, the most logical move would then be Nashville to take Atlanta's spot, Minnesota moving to the Central, with the new Winnipeg going to the Northwest.

#2131262 Swedish star - Carl Hagelin sign with the Wings?

Posted by Buppy on 16 March 2011 - 10:55 PM

I'm not exactly defending Leino here with the following comment. It's actually from a place that just dislikes Jason Williams. On the line of Leino-Filppula-Williams, which was what they started the year with, I'm almost positive Babs demanded that Leino play the role of Cleary/Homer on that line. I'm sure Leino thought, "How does this guy get to be one of the two skill guys on this line over me?"

Not saying Leino was justified for not playing hard enough, but if I were Leino I probably wouldn't like seeing a ****** like Williams have a job that I think I should have.

Yeah, except for the part where that didn't actually happen, you have a point.

Not even Homer gets pigeon-holed into the 'Homer role' all that often 5v5. We're not on the PP all game, and at even strength every player on the ice is expected to move around, pursue the puck, get open, shoot, make plays...that's exactly what has made us so good for so long is that we specifically don't try to limit our players. Leino was never asked to just park himself in front of the net. He had plenty of freedom offensively.

And while that line didn't produce many points, they did earn a lot of praise pre-season and the first handful of games for all the chances and pressure they created. It was only after like 8-10 games that Babs started pointing out that you can't score if no one shoots, or shoots only from the perimeter with no traffic or net crashing for rebounds.

Shortly after that Flip got hurt, then Willy. Leino had chances with better players and more minutes, PP time...but he kept getting worse and played himself off the team. Then he goes to Philly and eventually started doing all the things Babs said he needed to do, and surprise, he was successful.

I suppose you could say the defensive responsibility all our players are expected to show was limiting, but it's not like he was asked to be a checker. He's a scorer that was put in a scoring role. Maybe he didn't fit Babcock's style, or didn't mesh on or off the ice with his teammates, or just lost confidence and got frustrated. Maybe needed more ice time with better/different linemates more suited to compensate for his weaknesses. Maybe couldn't take the pressuure of being expected to score when injuries started piling up. Maybe he was just lazy and sucked.

But to suggest his talent wasn't recognized and he was mis-used is ridiculous. Flip and Willy maybe weren't the best linemates, but he was a rookie and it was a short period of games that looked promising at first. Without the injuries the lines would have been juggled eventually, and maybe we'd have found a combination with better results. With the injuries it was surely a tough situation for Leino, and I don't have any ill-will towards him. But you can't blame the team.

Sorry for going way off-topic.

#2130354 No offensive creativity

Posted by Buppy on 14 March 2011 - 08:11 PM

Agreed. The talent is definitely there. It's almost as if we expect to score 3+ goals night in and night out without any effort at all. Sometimes it is as simple as chipping the puck in deep, wearing down the opposition's defensemen on the forecheck, and crashing the net. Abdelkader needs to step up and play the way we brought him up to. Stir it up, and go to the areas not many others on the team are willing to go. Back to basics.

This argument would carry a lot more weight if we weren't the top scoring team in the league, still 3rd best record overall despite 3 1/2 months mostly lacking in effort. I mean it's hard to criticize guys for 'expecting 3+ goals a night without any effort' when that is what they are getting.

'Dump and don't chase' never works, but unfortunately 'turn on the skill for 10% of the game and coast the rest' works far too well for our own good. Maybe we'd be a better team if we lost more, ironically enough.

I don't think lack of creativity or lack of grit is the problem, though more of either would help. Mostly the guys aren't moving well off the puck. You can't be creative when everyone is standing around watching instead of trying to get open. You can't win battles if guys aren't moving in to good support positions. That stuff just isn't happening enough right now. Too much 'let Pav and Helmer (or whoever is hot at the time) do it' mentality. For good or bad, it's worked pretty well so far. It won't work in the playoffs of course, but we just have to hope they turn the switch by then.

#2123131 Seabrook extended for 5 years at $5.8 million per year

Posted by Buppy on 27 February 2011 - 05:25 PM

For the Blackhawks, its overpayment. They already dismantled half their team because of the big contracts that have with Toews, Kane, Keith, Campbell and Hossa. Now add Seabrook to that list. The Hawks clearly don't realize that the reason they won the Cup last year was because they had depth.

Campbell is the bad contract there.

With the raise, Chicago is paying around $275k more for Toews, Kane, Hossa, Keith, and Seabrook than we are for Pav, Hank, Mule, Nick, and Rafi. Both have two long-term deals. With the exception of Hossa, those guys are young and still improving.

The cap is expected to go up, perhaps by a significant amount, and the $4M bonus overage they're paying this year goes away. Even if they can't get rid of Campbell, they are not really bad off. $10M + whatever cap raise to sign 10-12 players, mostly bottom line players who should cost under $1M. If they could somehow dump Campbell, they'd actually be in pretty good shape.

#2123088 Seabrook extended for 5 years at $5.8 million per year

Posted by Buppy on 27 February 2011 - 02:32 PM


Big, young, RH, shutdown defenseman. Plays in all situations. Hits. Blocks shots. Has performed well in the playoffs. Should still be improving.

I wouldn't call it a bargain, but it's not overpayment either.

#2122919 Jiri Hudler Watch Thread

Posted by Buppy on 26 February 2011 - 11:55 PM

No. And there is a thread about this in the rumor mill, where it belongs.

Excuse me for interrupting your Hudler handjob. I'll wait until he goes cold again and you go back into hiding before I mention him again.

#2115441 Separated at Birth?

Posted by Buppy on 12 February 2011 - 02:56 PM

Was watching the Wings - Bruins game last night and it suddenly occurred to me that the Bruins coach looked very much like these other NHL coaches:

Yep. Little known fact: All fat, bald, white guys are related.

#2113982 Trade Deadline and You are GM.

Posted by Buppy on 09 February 2011 - 10:35 PM

Meszaros may not have been as physical as Stuart 3-4 years ago. Does that really make a difference to NOW? Stuart has been getting less physical over the past few years, and his defense has declined considerably since 2008.

Stuart had over 200 hits last year. His highest total since the lockout (possibly a career high, NHL.com doesn't have pre-lockout hits). He was pretty close to that pace again this year. He still is more physical than Mesz, or certainly on a similar level.

He has been rock solid for most of the past two seasons defensively. Easily 2nd best on the team. For many games both last year and this, he was arguably even better than Nick. Like most people, you probably just fixate on the mistakes. Watch any player close enough, looking for flaws, and you will find them.