Wings 0, Blackhawks 3

Realism: I got pretty pumped about this game, drawing way too much confidence from the team’s performance against a crappy-but-talented Tampa Bay team and blindly projecting it on a meeting with a squad that has it together much more than the Lightning do. In retrospect, that was dumb.

The Wings’ chances of beating a mostly healthy Chicago team while down nine key regulars were pretty slim. Add in the fact that they’d played a road game the day before and the chances get even slimmer. So last night was a nice slap in the face from reality: the Blackhawks can beat a majorly depleted, unrested Detroit team with a rusty goalie on home ice.

Kudos, Hawks. Feel good about that one, Chicago fans.

Osgood: I thought Osgood played well—except, you know, for those three plays where he apparently blacked out or something. He was getting next to no support for the bulk of the game and has never been the guy to win games outright in a Hasekian manner, but wow. Three weak ones aren’t going to cut it, Oz.

John W. put it well in the comments:

If we can’t get a motivated Osgood after Howard is threatening his job, then when can we? It looks to me that he is taking for granted the notion that he is automatically the playoff starter. What he fails to see is that the playoffs are not a lock this year, and neither is his default status as the starter.

I don’t like getting on Osgood and singling him out, but I stand by this other comment from John W.:

The team as a whole did not play well, but that’s when you need the goalie to step up, not sabotage the team from behind.

On the team didn’t play well note: They really didn’t. It’s one thing to admit that the odds were stacked against them given their roster depletion, but it’s another to come out flat and remain that way the bulk of the game. Chicago came to play and were obviously highly motivated, but a better effort by the Wings would have made their job more difficult. A weakened roster isn’t an excuse to not bust your hump on every shift.

Stupid “traditions”: The “Detroit sucks” chant is really classless, tradition or not. Chicago fans should be better than that.

Wednesday: It’ll be interesting to see how the Hawks do in slightly less friendly environs on Wednesday against a slightly altered Detroit team. Howard will be in and Matthias Ritola will be as well, having replaced Kris Newbury as the Current Forward Call-Up.

I hope the Wings come to the rink with a better effort in hand. Maybe they can force a different result.

Filed under: 2009-2010, Game Reports

Tags:

Comments

  1. Ryan says:

    Matt,

    Any updates on when the Wings can expect any regulars back in the line up? I would assume Fil is quite close, but I can't seem to find any details. It would also be nice to know how Kronner, Willy and Cleary are progressing. Any insight?

    Ryan

    • Matt Saler says:

      Ryan,

      All I know is that Fil's scheduled to return between Christmas and the New Year. I haven't heard much about the others lately, though Franzen's working like crazy to get back as soon as possible. I would think Williams isn't that far off, but that's all I can guess.

  2. John W. says:

    I probably lit into Ozzie a bit much last night, but that Byfuglien goal REALLY pissed me off, and the other 1 being 5 hole (shocker, I know) was all I could take. He was better in the 3rd, but by then it's too late. With the way Babs has been playing Howard steadily, save for back 2 back games, Ozzie has to know he's not the automatic starter right now, and I just expected so much more in a big game.

    One of the positives I saw was the fact that despite how depleted they were, that game was still very winnable with solid goaltending. That game could have easily went to OT at 0-0. A 75%+ healthy Wings team wins that game more often than not. The problem right now is a good defensive team, like the Hawks, can key in on the Wings only scoring line and focus on shutting them down, while daring the likes of Miller, Eaves, and Helm to win the game.

    They just have to stick to the party line: win enough game to stay in the playoff picture until our players start returning. We'll see how much "Detroit Sucks" in April. BTW, it really is quite sad when you have as good a team as Chicago does, and instead of cheering for your own team, you have to resort to that kind of chant. Inferiority complex anyone?

  3. different Ryan says:

    I missed the first 10 minutes, but from what I saw, Datsyuk gave a Herculian effort, particularly in the second period, when he was the only Wing doing anything, and he was doing it every time he touched ice.

    Mickey cut into the team's effort level, too. I'm sure lots of other commentators and reporters and bloggers I don't read are doing the same. But I think you hit the nail with the first part of your post: the Wings didn't lose that game because they were outworked.

  4. Andre says:

    "The “Detroit sucks” chant is really classless, tradition or not. Chicago fans should be better than that."

    Honestly, its never bothered me. I've been to about 50% of the Wings games here in Chicago since 2001, so I've learned to smile whenever I hear that chant. If the Wings hadn't been good for so long, the chant wouldn't exist. Not to get all high-minded, but fan-bases are largely the same, with some notable exceptions (Phillie, Boston and NY come to mind). You're going to find this type of thing everywhere, even in Detroit, even in our fan-base. They have a silly chant. And? I think the only reason it hurts this year is our relation in the standings.

    If Chicago fans need to be better than that chant, then we need to be better than some of our blogs like A2Y, no? I don't feel like giving that up, neither should they.

  5. Ryan says:

    Matt,

    Thanks for the update on Fil and Franzen.

  6. Cam says:

    The Blackhawks were mostly healthy is you consider the absences of Bolland, Barker, Eager and Burish.

  7. Garth says:

    "If Chicago fans need to be better than that chant, then we need to be better than some of our blogs like A2Y, no?"

    No.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    *

    You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>