Re: 2009 Chicago Blackhawks

[brinoch]

They could also be maneuvering as they seek to make another, larger trade.

[kujay]

They could also be maneuvering as they seek to make another, larger trade.

 

I don't know, I don't see this fellow they got as being particularly desirable to anyone. And I doubt Johnson was much of a cap hit.

 

Looking forward to the game tonight. I don't care what happened last spring. DETROIT (still) SUCKS!

[jersey cubs fan]

They could also be maneuvering as they seek to make another, larger trade.

 

I don't know, I don't see this fellow they got as being particularly desirable to anyone. And I doubt Johnson was much of a cap hit.

 

Looking forward to the game tonight. I don't care what happened last spring. DETROIT (still) SUCKS!

 

The maneuvering may not necessarily be about acquiring somebody another team would want, but rather acquiring somebody you wouldn't mind using in replace of whomever gets traded.

[kujay]

Interesting comments from Babcock and possibility May will suit up tonight:

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=4542216

 

Sounds like he's tired of playing European nancy hockey.

[brinoch]

Why not have the best of both worlds! One Canuck thug and a bunch of nancy-hockey loving scandinavians.

[kujay]

Why not have the best of both worlds! One Canuck thug and a bunch of nancy-hockey loving scandinavians.

 

Hey, it's worked for them.

 

But I prefer even my scoring forwards to have a nasty edge to them.

[NewUserName]

Interesting comments from Babcock and possibility May will suit up tonight:

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=4542216

 

Sounds like he's tired of playing European nancy hockey.

 

Things the Wings do well...Check, Forecheck, backcheck, battle for pucks in corners, play physical in front of net.

 

Things the Wings avoid...Fighting, running at players long after they have released the puck to just make a big hit but take yourself out of play, stupid scrums after whistle.

 

The first list I made was things that physical play does that helps a team win. The second group is things that players do just to show how tough they are but dont help win hockey games. Team oriented...individual oriented. I am glad the Wings play "Nancy" hockey.

 

 

What Babcock is getting frustrated with is some of the activities that go on after the whistle. I am not sure adding Brad May is a good solution.

[kujay]

Interesting comments from Babcock and possibility May will suit up tonight:

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=4542216

 

Sounds like he's tired of playing European nancy hockey.

 

Things the Wings do well...Check, Forecheck, backcheck, battle for pucks in corners, play physical in front of net.

 

Things the Wings avoid...Fighting, running at players long after they have released the puck to just make a big hit but take yourself out of play, stupid scrums after whistle.

 

The first list I made was things that physical play does that helps a team win. The second group is things that players do just to show how tough they are but dont help win hockey games. Team oriented...individual oriented. I am glad the Wings play "Nancy" hockey.

 

 

What Babcock is getting frustrated with is some of the activities that go on after the whistle. I am not sure adding Brad May is a good solution.

 

I was surprised to hear him say that. But it suggests that perhaps some of the running around (from your "second list") does in fact help the team win games if it keeps the skill guys on the ice.

[brinoch]

The problem is that the refs quickly default back to the bad old NHL -- allowing intimidating physical play after the whistle, for example. The playoffs were a perfect example of this. All season, they kept the physicality low and generally enforced things... but once the playoffs started, that was right out the window.

 

I like the way the Wings play. I thought the series with the Hawks was a fairly clean series on both sides, and even though the Hawks lost, I really preferred watching that style of play over all the crap that went on after the whistle against the Flames, for example.

[kujay]

The problem is that the refs quickly default back to the bad old NHL -- allowing intimidating physical play after the whistle, for example. The playoffs were a perfect example of this. All season, they kept the physicality low and generally enforced things... but once the playoffs started, that was right out the window.

 

I like the way the Wings play. I thought the series with the Hawks was a fairly clean series on both sides, and even though the Hawks lost, I really preferred watching that style of play over all the crap that went on after the whistle against the Flames, for example.

 

The playoffs are always different. The refs swallow their whistles, and the guys know it.

[NewUserName]

Interesting comments from Babcock and possibility May will suit up tonight:

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=4542216

 

Sounds like he's tired of playing European nancy hockey.

 

Things the Wings do well...Check, Forecheck, backcheck, battle for pucks in corners, play physical in front of net.

 

Things the Wings avoid...Fighting, running at players long after they have released the puck to just make a big hit but take yourself out of play, stupid scrums after whistle.

 

The first list I made was things that physical play does that helps a team win. The second group is things that players do just to show how tough they are but dont help win hockey games. Team oriented...individual oriented. I am glad the Wings play "Nancy" hockey.

 

 

What Babcock is getting frustrated with is some of the activities that go on after the whistle. I am not sure adding Brad May is a good solution.

 

I was surprised to hear him say that. But it suggests that perhaps some of the running around (from your "second list") does in fact help the team win games if it keeps the skill guys on the ice.

 

 

Yeah, simple truth is until recently every team in the NHL had a thug for a reason. Sadly a thug who can play good puck control hockey are very rare. I think it is too bad that Todd Bertuzzi lost his testicles after the Moore incident. Of course if he still had them the Wings would not have picked him up for so cheap.

[UMFan83]

Decent first period. Osgood looked pretty good, with a lesser goalie performance we'd have a goal or two

[gflore34]

Another [expletive] Red Wing goal vs. the Hawks.

[UMFan83]

Sharpie with the first stateside goal on the year to make it 1-0 Hawks!

 

But Lindstrom ties it up for the Wings a little bit later.

[brinoch]

That's on Barker.

[bukie]

[expletive] refs.

[Soul]

Damn Wings.

[jersey cubs fan]

So in my completely novice hockey strategy mind, I saw Q's timeout during the 5 on 3 as an unnecessary panic move. It was basically telling the team, if we don't score here we are doomed. What is the point of putting that much pressure on yourself for a 5 on 3? Sure, it sucks not to score on one, but I'd rather just not score and go on than call a timeout, adding extra emphasis on how screwed we are if we don't score, and then not score.

[kujay]

I was stuck with the Wings feed on NHLN last night, and they described the Hawks at one point as skating in sand. That was my impression from the 10-minute mark of the first period on. They just looked slow. Now, Detroit didn't look much better, but they also got a few bounces and were facing a goaltender who isn't going to steal games like Osgood can.

 

Hjalmarsson looked pretty bad last night, and that Smolanek guy is useless. If Eager is healthy, there is no reason that dude should be on the ice. Oh, and Sopel sucks.

[kujay]

So in my completely novice hockey strategy mind, I saw Q's timeout during the 5 on 3 as an unnecessary panic move. It was basically telling the team, if we don't score here we are doomed. What is the point of putting that much pressure on yourself for a 5 on 3? Sure, it sucks not to score on one, but I'd rather just not score and go on than call a timeout, adding extra emphasis on how screwed we are if we don't score, and then not score.

 

That's over-thinking it, to my mind. I don't think Q calling that timeout cemented in the guys' heads that they were fucked if they didn't score. It said they had a golden opportunity to take a two-goal lead and it was worth the extra time to draw something up.

 

Now, that said, I disagree with Q calling the TO there because it gave Detroit's PK'ers a breather.

[jersey cubs fan]

So in my completely novice hockey strategy mind, I saw Q's timeout during the 5 on 3 as an unnecessary panic move. It was basically telling the team, if we don't score here we are doomed. What is the point of putting that much pressure on yourself for a 5 on 3? Sure, it sucks not to score on one, but I'd rather just not score and go on than call a timeout, adding extra emphasis on how screwed we are if we don't score, and then not score.

 

That's over-thinking it, to my mind. I don't think Q calling that timeout cemented in the guys' heads that they were [expletive] if they didn't score. It said they had a golden opportunity to take a two-goal lead and it was worth the extra time to draw something up.

 

Now, that said, I disagree with Q calling the TO there because it gave Detroit's PK'ers a breather.

 

Q calling the timeout was overthinking.

[NewUserName]

So in my completely novice hockey strategy mind, I saw Q's timeout during the 5 on 3 as an unnecessary panic move. It was basically telling the team, if we don't score here we are doomed. What is the point of putting that much pressure on yourself for a 5 on 3? Sure, it sucks not to score on one, but I'd rather just not score and go on than call a timeout, adding extra emphasis on how screwed we are if we don't score, and then not score.

 

That's over-thinking it, to my mind. I don't think Q calling that timeout cemented in the guys' heads that they were [expletive] if they didn't score. It said they had a golden opportunity to take a two-goal lead and it was worth the extra time to draw something up.

 

Now, that said, I disagree with Q calling the TO there because it gave Detroit's PK'ers a breather.

 

Stuart and Kronwall were on the ice before the TO. I am sure Q was thinking that Lids and Rafalski were coming out anyway and there is probably not that much difference between Zetterburg and Datsyuk. I think the TO was more so he could get his top guys a breather. I was shocked that Stuart and Kronwall came back out to finish the 5-3. I dont think there was anything wrong with using the TO there.

[17 Seconds]

So the Franzen injury evens out the Hossa injury

[kujay]

Bowman removed head from ass. Recalled Skille, waived Smolanek.

 

http://blackhawks.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=501751

 

Bolland back tonight too.

[17 Seconds]

that was awful