Jump to content

Nightfall's Photo


Member Since 10 Dec 2003
Offline Last Active Dec 17 2014 10:12 AM

#2025213 Wings' Goaltending Situation

Posted by Nightfall on 11 August 2010 - 03:44 PM

Like Howard, support him... be his secret BFF but your are kidding yourself. His rebound control was terrible, he was caught out of position and bailed out the the team too often, and his 5 hole was as wide as the grand canyon some nights. It was his rookie season in the NHL and he has a lot of improvements to make. No, we did not lose in the playoffs solely because of goal tending but we weren't helped along by it by any means... some nights he was flat out crap. If he has done his work in the off season and worked out some of the bugs then he'll be fine and if he hasn't then he'd better stop listening to his secret BFF's

I guess I have to ask you the same question. Name me a number 1 goalie that you would choose that would fit the mold of that kind of goalie who has...

1. Almost perfect rebound control
2. Hardly ever caught out of position
3. Covers the 5 hole almost perfectly

I think your expectations are a little unrealistic. I think you will find that 90% of the elite NHL goalies out there are in fact the best in the world and pretty even when it comes to skill level. Brodeur and Roy were the best in their prime thats for sure and those are in the top 10% echelon. You have to figure that those players are rare and thats why they stick around for many years with their respective teams. Their teams know how valuable they are and pay them accordingly. The Wings have no such player in their system, and in fact, I don't see any goalie that has had that kind of consistency that is currently in the NHL. Brodeur hasn't won a playoff series in 4 years and is past his prime. Most of the good goalies you are hearing about now are one year wonders.

I am just pointing out that most hockey fans have these lavish unrealistic expectations of their team's goalies. If every hockey fan had their wish, the goalie would be a literal God in net and they would make a save on everything. The simple fact of the matter is that goalies are human, and humans make mistakes. The good goalies rebound from those mistakes and play better the next night. Howard has shown signs of that last season, and will be a better player this year.

#2025192 Wings' Goaltending Situation

Posted by Nightfall on 11 August 2010 - 03:01 PM

You honestly don't think Howard had a problem with rebound control, nor he had issues in the playoffs?

Yup, I thought he played just fine. He made as many mistakes as other goalies have in the past. Look at every stanley cup winning team. Every goalie has had their fair share of mistakes. To say that Howard was the make or break of the team winning/losing is pretty disingenuous if you ask me.

I could point out many instances, but look at Niemi last season. Against Vancouver, he played pretty badly with over a 3.00GAA. He did not play very well and made his share of mistakes. Still, the team in front of him pulled together and won the series. How about in 1998 with Osgood when he was letting in horrible goals at inopportune times. If the wings lost out that year, Osgood would have been thrown under the bus. As it turns out, they won the cup that year and Osgood was the man.

I am just saying that a lot of casual armchair hockey fans really have unrealistic expectations of what their goalie should do for them.

#1986928 Ville Leino Appreciation Thread

Posted by Nightfall on 18 May 2010 - 10:17 PM

Its great to see Leino do well in Philly. Its just further proof that there are a few players that when faced with a change of scenery, they do well. Is it the coach? Is it the environment? Who knows. All I do know is that he deserved the success he has had so far. Wings fans shouldn't feel slighted at all as this does happen from time to time.

#1982644 Let's Talk About the Refereeing

Posted by Nightfall on 10 May 2010 - 10:10 AM

That said, I think there can be more improvements to how games are called. I, along with many others, would simply like to have more consistency in the calls. I don't much care if games are called loose or tight, as long as it is consistent. Overall, I think how refs have to interpret calls needs to be more clarified. For example, the whole kicking/propelling a puck. there has got to be a way to allow pucks to go into the net for goals off of skates while still keeping goalies safe from having people kicking their blades at him.

There are a few penalties that get me mad every time. I hate how a slash that breaks a stick, or knocks it out of a player's hands is an instant penalty. Some of these sticks break when someone receives a soft pass! And allowing a player to gain a penalty by dropping his stick is a farce to me. I also don't like the hooking calls where the player being hooked closes his arm on the stick and pins it to him. If anything, I'd like that to be 2 for hooking, 2 for holding and send both to the box.

Overall, I think the game could be improved with more off-ice punishment. I LOVED back before the lockout when they would announce fines for players that dived. Then that went away. I think it should come back. Dives can be hard to catch in the moment, but are easier via review. Announce fines for dives. After 2 or 3 dives, a player gets suspended. Subsequent dives have longer suspensions. Maybe suspend a coach when his team reaches a certain seasonal dive threshold. Embarrass the players, and make them hurt their teams by missing games, and diving will become much less a part of the game.

I feel that consistency is all relative to how the ref is doing. There are some games I watch where its real loose out there. Other games are very tight. Its good to not see pre-lockout hockey thats for sure, but even in loose games you see a little more hooking and interference than you would in a tight game. So how do you make things more consistent? Thats hard because no matter what, refs are going to call different games. When you see a trip happen out there, maybe 6 out of 10 refs would say it was a trip while the other 4 would say he lost an edge.

I agree with you on the slashing calls too. Just because a slash breaks a stick doesn't mean its a penalty. Refs have to be able to make that judgment call on their own. Sure, the broken stick is a bad sign, but I feel that there are some instances (about 15%) where a players stick breaks and it wasn't a slash. Same with dives. I find the diving call to be stupid as hell. If you call player A for a trip and player B for a dive, how the hell did player A trip player B then? A dive is a dive. I don't know why player A should be penalized for player B diving.

The rules are what they are though. The refs have to work around those rules as best as they can. If they go outside the rules, some refs get penalized themselves in fines or "time off" where they don't get any games. Yes, that happens in USA hockey, college hockey, and pro hockey. Refs do get penalized for making mistakes.

#1982614 Let's Talk About the Refereeing

Posted by Nightfall on 10 May 2010 - 08:11 AM

I remember back about 8 years ago when I would get frustrated with refereeing when I would watch hockey. I played hockey and I just didn't understand why, as a goalie, I could see penalties that the ref wouldn't see right in front of them. Last year, I decided to get my USA Hockey certification and start reffing. It was a very good experience for me, and it really opened my eyes to what happens out there on the ice.

Now, a lot of the comments I see are from people who have never reffed hockey before. Heck, I am betting that 95% of you have never reffed any sport before. There are a couple things that people should at least consider before drawing conclusions about a game or a series and how it was reffed.

First, I consider hockey to be one of the hardest sports to referee. The game moves so fast, and in the course of a play, the ref has to break it down in his head. I thought, as a goalie moving into reffing, that I would be better at this. The simple fact of the matter is that I wasn't. I spend a lot of time studying the rules, taping my games to watch it from a fan's perspective, and also talking to coaches and players. There are a lot of fans that talk out of their asses about how the reffing is when they have never reffed a game in their lives. I am a firm believer that people should walk a mile in their shoes before passing judgment. Give reffing a try before you ***** about the reffing. A lot of people don't even want to go down that road because its hard or they are lazy.

Second, refs are human. They do miss calls. They do make mistakes. I never understood why the refs in the NHL get a free pass on all these things. One of the things I pride myself on is being honest with all players and coaches out on the ice. If I made a mistake, I own up to it. The league officials may not expect that, but I expect it from myself. I question Gary Bettmen when he stands behind his refs 100% and insists that mistakes are never made. As a fan of hockey, everyone should just acknowledge the fact that mistakes and missed calls are going to happen in the course of a game.

Third, there is no conspiracy. Refs are consummate professionals. I am a hockey fan as much as I am a Wings fan. I don't see any conspiracy out there. Sure, I see mistakes. I see missed calls in every game, but its easy for an armchair fan to watch a game and see something bad. Especially a fan of a team that sees something against his team. Which is why you hear 20,000 fans boo the refs when they don't get a call. Try attending a hockey game or watching one on TV where you don't care who wins or loses. What would you call in the course of that game? How many penalties total? I bet if you were watching the Wings you would easily call a 3 to 1 margin in favor of the Wings. Now, that would be a conspiracy if you were reffing.

I know that a lot of Wings fans feel slighted about the reffing. Heck, I feel that way. I feel the Wings came out on the bad end of some calls in the game, thats for sure. At the same time though, the Sharks were in fact more disciplined. As Mickey said after the last game, when you are chasing the other team around, you are going to commit more penalties. Well, they spent a lot of the games of this series chasing the sharks around. The sharks deserved to win, and the refs were not swinging it in their direction. The Red Wings were giving them the games by committing timely penalties.

In the end, I listen to what a lot of Wings fans have to say and I just *facepalm*. Here fans are bitching about the reffing and saying that the refs gave the series to the Sharks. Ok, well if that was the case, then their team as it is should be just fine for next season. Nope! They are too old and slow and need to be revamped. So was it the refs fault in the end? Or was it a worth ethic issue? Or was it just the fact that the Sharks out hustled and out played the wings? In the Stanley Cup playoffs, I am a firm believer that the hungrier team always advances. The Sharks were the hungrier team.

#1981366 WCSF Game 5 GDT: Red Wings 1 at Sharks 2

Posted by Nightfall on 08 May 2010 - 11:40 PM

Assholes? The Sharks were the better team. We got beat in every.f******. aspect of the game.

Its good to see smart wings fans acknowledging that.

Faceoffs? San Jose's favor, especially key faceoffs that you needed to win.
Scoring Chances? San Jose's favor
Turnovers? San Jose has less in the series.

The Sharks were hungrier. Nabokov really exorcised some playoff demons. Howard played well, but he did have a couple bad goals in the series. He will learn from those and deserves another shot.

#1981134 WCSF Game 5 GDT: Red Wings 1 at Sharks 2

Posted by Nightfall on 08 May 2010 - 11:17 PM

The refs are losing control of this game. Murray just got nailed, no call. This is how players get hurt.

#1981114 WCSF Game 5 GDT: Red Wings 1 at Sharks 2

Posted by Nightfall on 08 May 2010 - 11:15 PM

I think its safe to say the the refs had a DIRECT impact on that goal. Anyone who argues otherwise is an idiot, yes it was a turnover but the play should have never been in our end.

The Wings being slopping in their own zone was the reason why they scored. The refs were not involved, unfortunately. Put the blame where it belongs, on the Wings.

#1980731 WCSF Game 5 GDT: Red Wings 1 at Sharks 2

Posted by Nightfall on 08 May 2010 - 10:20 PM

***** less about the reffing. The Wings have to be good enough to overcome them. There are so many ways the Wings can improve in this game and so far they are barely getting by.

#1978078 WCSF Game 4 GDT: Sharks 1 at Red Wings 7

Posted by Nightfall on 06 May 2010 - 07:09 PM

agreed babs should bench him this is just despicable

I think Dat should just stop posting until he eats some crow.

#1976390 What I'm worried about

Posted by Nightfall on 05 May 2010 - 09:09 AM

You can't win a Stanley Cup every year. There are 30 teams in the league. 16 of them make the playoffs. You have teams that have drafted smart and those that buy free agents. Chemistry is a huge factor in the playoffs as well. Sometimes teams strike gold with players who work well with each other. In the end, they crown one champion. I think its hard to hold Ken Holland and the Red Wings to lofty expectations, especially in the salary cap world. The Wings are going to be competitive, but they won't make it to the cup finals every year. They may not even make the playoffs in the next 5 years or so.

I think a lot of Wings fans feel they are entitled to a championship every year. Which is why the refs are being blamed heavily. After all, the Wings are unstoppable! The only one that can stop them is Gary Bettmen [/sarcasm]! What Wings fans have to understand is that the Wings brass will always try to get a championship caliber team together, but it isn't going to work out every year. Some years will be better than others.

Case in point, look at the last six championship teams. The Devils? Tampa Bay? Carolina? The Ducks? Red Wings? Pens? Its a vicious cycle and teams cannot stay at the top for long. The Devils continue to make playoffs but haven't been past the first round in years. Tampa Bay has missed the playoffs more in the last six years than making them. Carolina had a good playoff run last year, but didn't even make it this year. The Ducks have been hit or miss as well. The Wings have made the playoffs every season, and have had varied success. Even the Pens have had their share of playoff disappointment before winning the cup last season.

The Wings will be a threat, and will challenge for the cup for a while. What I don't expect is for them to fall off the face of the earth like some of these cup winning teams. I think the Wings have made the playoffs for 16 consecutive years or something like that. That will end, like all records do eventually, but the management has made a commitment to spending to the cap and competing for a championship every year. The players they bring in buy into that as well.

#1976381 There are 7 games in a series

Posted by Nightfall on 05 May 2010 - 08:57 AM

Well, thankfully it isn't up to us. If Mindfly and other pessimists were in charge of the team, they probably wouldn't even show up to Game 4 and just forfeit. From a personal standpoint, if I was down 3-0, I would come out and play a hard fought game and hold my head high when the game is over. No sense of crying over spilled milk. Come out and give it your best shot and leave it all on the ice.

#1975958 There are 7 games in a series

Posted by Nightfall on 04 May 2010 - 10:39 PM

Seems like most people have forgotten, there are 7 games in a playoff series. It's first to 4 wins, not 3. Obviously the odds are VERY LOW, but it is STILL POSSIBLE. I think we have the skill to pull off a miracle. How about you guys?


I am with you. Its time for the Wings to put it all on the line. GO WINGS!

#1975502 WCSF Game 3 GDT: Sharks 4 at Red Wings 3

Posted by Nightfall on 04 May 2010 - 09:40 PM

Wings have no one to blame but themselves. Lazy play in the 3rd and OT doesn't win you games.

#1975163 WCSF Game 3 GDT: Sharks 4 at Red Wings 3

Posted by Nightfall on 04 May 2010 - 09:02 PM

Game isn't over yet! LETS GO WINGS!