Wings 5, Blackhawks 4

Roller coaster: This game was a bit of a ride, eh? Big drop right at the start with that horrible first period (don’t let the fact that it only ended 0-2 fool you. It was horrible), then a big climb in the second followed by corkscrews and too-fast smaller dips and climbs in the third. Wild.

First period: The Wings looked terrible and were incredibly fortunate to only be down by two at the end of the first twenty minutes. And I don’t know if that was Chicago incompetence or what. I guess it was less their incompetence and more luck for the Wings since it could have been 0-3 had the Kane goal not been called back on an incidental contact call on Byfuglien (his feet made contact with Howard, so it was a good call). It’s sad that at this stage in the season, the Wings still need large swaths of time to get their legs under them every night.

This time was worse than usual, which led to a better than usual second period.

Second period: Yeah, that was awesome. And totally unexpected. To me, anyway. Nothing the Wings had done to that point gave any sign that they had that kind of push in them for that game.

Of course, they were helped big time by Cristobal “Gaping Liability” Huet. Even with a better goalie in net for Chicago, the Wings probably would have tied it up or taken a 1 goal lead or something, but Huet’s trainwreck made a five-goal period possible. The Hawks have nearly all the pieces necessary for a long playoff run, but they’re missing what’s probably the most important one: a competent goalie. If they had that, even their relative immaturity could be overcome. As it is, though, I can’t see them finding success with a guy like Huet undermining a great defense and offense. How they didn’t go all out to find a decent goalie at the deadline is beyond me.

Third period: Despite the Wings’ dominant second, it was obvious the game wasn’t over. The Hawks are too talented for that. And they didn’t disappoint in the “making it a game” category, unfortunately. This period was a little high on the drama, for sure. I could have done without the storming back to nearly tying it up crap. The same old script seemed to be playing out, but somehow the Wings held on.

Big pair of points and maybe a win that will help this team have the right kind of confidence.

Franzen’s Post-hockey career: Miming. His miming of Bolland’s dive fon that scuffle in the third was classic Franzen awesome. And Bolland’s childish door slamming was hilarious. I hope he got his mushed bananas on the bench after that (because he’s a baby! Get it?!)

Snipers: I joked during the game that Chicago’s staff should check the rafters for snipers because it looked like Huet got headshotted by one in the second period. The joke’s still lame today, but the point is that was a really Oscar-worthy dive and was all the more impressive for its effect on my respect level for Huet. I didn’t know it could go any lower.

Bert: Did not like seeing him get injured at all. A very awkward collision. Supposedly, he’ll be back tomorrow night, which is great news.

Also, one of the mediots on NBC’s crew claimed Bert needs to start crashing and banging more. Couldn’t disagree more. Todd is not that player any more and cannot be. He’s a marked man and any foray into more physical play is going to lead to his being in the box more than he already is. There’s also the fact that he’s somewhat fragile and risks injury if he doesn’t walk the knife blade he’s been on all season, prior to the injury yesterday.

He’s not the physical player he once was and he never will be again. Give it up, ignorant pundits.

On the Crease: After the incidental contact call, Pierre McGuire was whining about how he didn’t like it and then once more proved he has no business being involved in hockey broadcasts when he asked, “don’t the goalies have to fight for their ground too?” No, Pierre, no they don’t. That is the exact purpose of the crease. That is their space, the only space explicitly given to a player. There are swaths of the rulebook dedicated to protecting their space. They do not have to fight for their ground inside that paint.

Eurotwins contrast: Pavel’s been great since the Break, but as Ellen pointed out, Zetterberg has not. What’s going on there, Hank? Granted you made a nice pass on the Williams goal last night, but that extra gear that Pavel’s hit doesn’t seem to be engaged. Let’s see it tomorrow, okay?

Speaking of tomorrow: As nice and important as the win yesterday was, I’d trade it for a win tomorrow. The Wings have to beat the Flames. This is the playoff race made real. Here’s hoping they bring their best.

Filed under: 2009-2010, Game Reports

Tags:

Comments

  1. Alex says:

    Zetterberg is playing hurt, you could see him wincing in pain on some close-ups in the late first period. who knows how bad it is but we can't afford him to take any time off to heal right now. maybe if we win a few more in a row…

  2. Garth says:

    "What’s going on there, Hank?"

    More than a point a game since the break, more than a point a game since the beginning of February, 16 points in the last 14 games overall, 21 in the last 20.

    Yeah, what's wrong with you Hank? Can't you do more for us? You suck, Hank.

    *rolls his eyes*

    • Matt Saler says:

      You suck, Hank.

      Right, because that's what I said. Do you read before you spout off?

      I may have overstated things with the claim that he's not been great, but that doesn't change the fact that he's being outplayed by Datsyuk, which is the point here. Cite all the stats you want but the on-ice picture is of a player with a gear or two in reserve.

      If Alex is right and it's an injury, that's one thing. If his head's just not in it like Datsyuk's is, that's entirely another. We don't need good out off him. We need excellence.

      • Andre says:

        I was about to agree with Matt, then I looked at the game logs for Z and saw 5 pts in 4 games since the Olympics and almost agreed with Garth, then looked again and saw only one "real" goal for Z since 2/6 (Nash's was EN).

        I can remember thinking to myself yesterday that Z hasn't been doing enough…although the stats would tend to refute that. So I guess its more of a case of looking bad in comparison to Datsyuk, who recently has been making anyone foolish enough to puck handle near him look…er, foolish.

        I get the impression that while Z has been "part" of a good deal of the scoring recently, Datsyuk is "creating" much more through sheer will/skill.

        In closing though, I concur with Alex: there were several shots of Z in discomfort v. Chicago. It would not surprise me at all to find out that he's playing through something.

      • Garth says:

        "Do you read before you spout off?"

        Yeah, I do. Maybe you want to ask yourself if you're familiar with sarcasm.

        "Cite all the stats you want but the on-ice picture is of a player with a gear or two in reserve." … "We don’t need good out off him. We need excellence."

        Well, if he had the production of a full season that he's had over the last 20 games, then he'd have his second-best points total of his career.

        Just because he's not doing flashy takeaways like Datsyuk, he's the second line centre and he's doing more than a point per game.

        This is par for the course though. Z's scoring more than a point per game lately, and the Wings have won four of the last five, but to read your blog Z would be on par with Ville Leino and the Wings would be chasing the Oilers for 14th place.

        • Matt Saler says:

          Just because he’s not doing flashy takeaways like Datsyuk, he’s the second line centre and he’s doing more than a point per game.

          Big surprise: you're missing the point. This isn't about trashing Zetterberg, which I am not doing.

          It's about pointing out that while others have elevated their game noticeably in the post-Olympic Break world, Z is still moving along at the same, admittedly high, level he was at before, while keeping that extra gear in reserve. The Wings need that extra gear.

          That's all I'm saying. At least I think so. I guess I should go back and check to make sure I'm not frothing at the mouth about how worthless Zetterberg is and how we should trade him to Philadelphia for a two-bit cheap shot artist. Hold on…

          Nope, doesn't look like sad anything at all like that or otherwise implied that anything that could possibly be construed by a reasonable person that I feel that way. But let me check again, just to be sure. …

          Nope, still not.

          Oh and about that last time I checked what I'm actually saying? I also looked to see if I said or implied that the Wings might as well be in 14th. Guess what I found. Nothing.

          • Garth says:

            "Big surprise: you’re missing the point."

            Yeah, it's my fault you have no ability to get your point across.

            "Datsyuk's playing great"

            "Zetterberg's not"

            "What’s going on there, Hank?"

            You're right.

            I should obviously not read that as being critical of Zetterberg, because of course it's OBVIOUS that you're NOT being critical of Zettererg. ESPECIALLY when you follow it up with a backhanded compliment. It was so clearly worded on your part.

            Boy is my face red.

            Care to change your story again? Maybe edit the article to support your new argument if you want to pretend you weren't being critical of Zetterberg because you article simply does NOT support your fabricated new argument.

            You know what though? You're right. I've gone back and read your articles and you've been nothing but positive and supportive. You don't nitpick the smallest little details in big wins, you don't whine and bitch about anything with some sort of sense of entitlement, like they owe you something.

            God, man, if you can't read the most obvious sarcasm and hyperbole then maybe you should go back to school and pick up some reading comprehension.

            "reasonable person"

            One might argue that, based on your pissy posts, finding the smallest negative to dwell on during a win, you're not exactly qualified to determine what a reasonable person should surmise.

          • Matt Saler says:

            Tell me I don't have to break out the definition of "great." Do you understand the meaning of the word? Can you comprehend how describing someone as playing less-than-great does not have to be an insult? Or do I have to explain to you, maybe with a graphic of a spectrum to illustrate the concept?

            Maybe it's splitting hairs to you, but saying Zetterberg is not playing great is not the same as saying he's playing like crap. Or has "great" become so diluted in our language as to confuse people like you?

            And since when did being critical become such a horrifyingly awful thing? Am I supposed to go through life blindly accepting the party line, drinking the Kool Aid and refusing to look at the whole picture?

            Go ahead and live in the delusion that everything's perfect there in your world were Zetterberg and the Wings are crapping rainbows.

            Meanwhile here, in the real world, Zetterberg's being outplayed by Datsyuk and the Wings are still not playing full games.

            Are those things the end of the world when the result turns out positive, as they did yesterday? No. But do they mean success when it counts? Maybe not.

            I'm not going to sugar-coat everything. Sorry. I'm not that kind of blogger. If you want that kind of spin, maybe you can stick to reading the official press releases.

            And I'm not going to go back and edit my post. What I said stands. I'm not that kind of blogger either. It's not my fault you chose to misinterpret what I wrote.

  3. Chris says:

    Even when the Wings win….your shit still sounds sarcastic.

    This was a great win. If they would've lost, this article would've been an article full of bashing.

    Zata is doing good right now? What Red Wings games are you watching?

    Datsyuk is being our best Red Wings because thats what he is…our best Red Wing

    Zetterberg is being our second best Red Wing…cause thats what he is

    Your a fool.

    P.S. McGuire is a tool. Don't know why he still broadcasts for NBC/TSN

    • Andre says:

      "Your a fool"

      He may be, but apparently you don't know your "you're" from your "your".

    • Andre says:

      "Datsyuk is being our best Red Wings because thats what he is…our best Red Wing

      Zetterberg is being our second best Red Wing…cause thats what he is"

      Were that only the case with their respective paychecks…

  4. Chris says:

    "Zata is doing good right now? "

    *spposed to say "isn't"

  5. Andre says:

    I love this blog. I started coming for the quick roster updates. I stay for the reasoned dialogue with Garth ;)

  6. Cam says:

    The goalie interference call was awful. Howard was barely touched. He fell because he was doing the butterfly. That slight nudge doesn't knock over a goalie.

  7. Baroque says:

    Wow. Lots of cranky people around hereabouts. :)

    I don't think Zetterberg is playing great – he is playing very, very well, but I think he's been fighting something for a while. It would have been nice if the team was healthy enough to have given him a week off earlier in the season so he could recover from whatever it is, instead of him needing to play because the team was short so many players at times.

    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>