SB Nation User Blog: joehass

Red Wings Lose Stanley Cup

joehass — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 03:13:38 -0000

The puck came to Nicklas Lidstrom with two seconds left. No pressure. Make the shot, we go to overtime.

He didn't make it.

The Pittsburgh Penguins, on the strength of two goals from Maxine Talbot, stunned the Detroit Red Wings 2-1 to win the Stanley Cup at Joe Louis Arena.

Make no mistake: the Penguins deserved to win this game. Their effort was incredible, making brilliant plays, and with Evgeni Malkin's Conn Smythe performance, there is no doubt that the right team skated away with the Cup.

Talbot spent the first period constantly skating past Red Wings defensemen, which set an ominous tone. In the second, he capitalized: after a sloppy play behind the net by Stewart, Talbot swiped the puck away to Malkin, who put the puck back to Talbot.

Osgood didn't stand a chance.

Talbot did it again nine minutes later: after Stuart tried to make something out of nothing in a pinch in the Wings end, it set up a two-on-one. Talbot skated in and beat Osgood wide, putting the puck up in the top right corner. The crowd was deflated.

Jonathan Ericsson's goal in the third gave the Red Wings a chance, but despite the wild finish, the Wings couldn't convert.

So now we reach the end. Banners will be raised next fall, but not the one banner that mattered.

But there are much larger issues coming out of this:

* The non-effort in the first two periods of Games 6 and 7.

* The lack of goals from Lidstrom, Tomas Holmstrom, and Pavel Datsuyk: three leaders of this team.

* The shocking turnovers from a lot of players, including Chris Osgood.

* The boneheaded plays from Brad Stuart that set up both Pens goals.

* And, most of all: Marian Hossa's disappearing act.

No one escapes blame here. It is a bitter ending to a glorious season. One that should leave a bad taste in everyone's mouth.

Ron MacLean and Gary Bettman talk hockey on CBC

joehass — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 13:16:36 -0000

It's widely known that Ron MacLean isn't exactly fond of Gary Bettman. The two talked on Hockey Night In Canada during the second intermission Tuesday night. For those who didn't see it, it appears below.

A couple things: I'm still not sure I believe this, but I completely agree with Bettman when it comes to Phoenix. As for the head shots: If the league would simply be consistent with the rules currently in place.

[Game Thread] Red Wings vs. Blackhawks Game 5

joehass — Wed, 27 May 2009 13:52:27 -0000

More photos » by Paul Beaty - AP

The last player Blackhawk fans expected to see Sunday: Corey Crawford.

Browse more photos »

The Western Conference Final comes back to Detroit for Game 5 tonight, as the Red Wings get their first chance to knock out the Blackhawks and get a rematch against the Pittsburgh Penguins (Eastern Conference playoff champions, sweeping the Carolina Hurricanes).

It would be foolish to assume Chicago will come out the same way they did in Game 4 (Joel Quenneville's now legendary quote notwithstanding). Still, with their backs to the wall for the first time in the playoffs, it will be interesting to see how the Blackhawks will come out.

As of this writing, Pavel Datsuyk and Nicklas Lidstrom for Detroit and Nikolai Khabibulin and Martin Havlat for Chicago are all day-to-day, which means it will be a game-time decision if they'll play; however, Datsuyk and Lidstrom did not skate this morning, meaning it's unlikely they'll play tonight. Chris Osgood will start in goal for the Red Wings.

While Game 4 forcefully answered the "When will Marian Hossa show up?" question, the APB continues for Patrick Kane. Five shots in four games and a minus seven will make him the focus of much attention at the end of this series.

As for Cristobal Huet, his underwhelming performance in Game 4 (being pulled for Corey Crawford after giving up five goals on 26 shots) doesn't give confidence to Blackhawks fans, who are hoping beyond hope to see a 39 behind the pipes instead of 38.

Game time is 7:30 p.m. ET on Versus and CBC. See you back here then.

On Versus, Gary Bettman Can't Follow His Own Advice

joehass — Wed, 27 May 2009 13:42:23 -0000

What you need to do in the future, when you make your reservation, call and say, 'Do you get Versus?' If they say no, then you should say, 'You should get Versus or I'm not coming,' and go to a different hotel.

Gary Bettman, May 12, 2009

The Wings found themselves in the same boat while staying in Chicago when seeking to watch the Eastern Conference final between the Pittsburgh Penguins and Carolina Hurricanes.

"I haven't even seen a game yet" Osgood said. "The hotel we were in doesn't have Versus."

CBC Sports, May 25, 2009

[Game Thread] Wings vs. Blackhawks Game 4

joehass — Sun, 24 May 2009 12:09:41 -0000

The Red Wings and Blackhawks face off in Game 4 of the Western Conference Finals. Chicago took Game 3 4-3 in overtime, in a game that had absolutely nothing interesting happen (assuming you don't count coming back from a 3-0 deficit or a game misconduct that shouldn't have been or the general crankiness pulsating through the series so far).

Questions coming into the game:

* Will Nikolai Khabibulin start? Our favorite type of injury, lower-body, was the reported reason for his sudden departure in Game 3, and Joel Quenneville wasn't tipping his hand yesterday, simply saying Khabibulin made "good progress" in the Saturday practice. Our guess: unless the lower-body injury involves the loss of limbs (not apparent, but don't put anything past an professional sports team's training staff), he'll be in there today. No offense to Cristobal Huet, whose ~~entire postseason career consists of~~ made his Blackhawks playoff debut in Game 3 (and whose name was clearly lifted from a Family Guy episode).

* Will Martin Havlat make an appearance? This is a little more complicated. Quenneville was even more wishy-washy on his status. If he suffered a concussion after Niklas Kronwall's hit (which it sure looked like, but IANAMD), then Havlat shouldn't be playing. Of course, try telling a hockey player not to play after a concussion (or any injury) in the playoffs.

* How day-to-day is Pavel Datsyuk? He sat out Game 3. Does Mike Babcock sit him for Game 4? And if he does, would it kill him to light the lamp?

* Can ~~Martin~~ Marian Hossa break through and score after two nice assists in Game 3?

Scheduled start time is 3:00 P.M. ET (though with NBC covering the game, it'll probably be closer to 3:20). NBC (ugh) has the game in the U.S., while CBC (yay!) has the coverage in Canada. See you back here then.

[Game Thread] Red Wings vs. Blackhawks Game 3

joehass — Fri, 22 May 2009 14:20:33 -0000

The Red Wings and Blackhawks take the 284 mile drive to the United Center for Game 3 of the Western Conference Finals.

With Detroit up 2-0 in the series, the Blackhawks need to stop the onslaught of the Red Wings. But the bigger question: when will the Chicago defense show up to help Nickolai Khabibulin? The Red Wings have been firing at him all series seemingly at will.

That being said, this series could just as easily be 2-0 Blackhawks. Chicago obviously had a chance at the Red Wings in Game 2, taking them to overtime, and despite the three-goal margin of victory in Game 1, the Blackhawks had Detroit relatively close through the first two periods, letting the game get away from them in the third.

Some things to watch in Game 3:

* Will either team's stars show up? Patrick Kane has no points on three shots. Marian Hossa has no points on seven shots. Pavel Datsuyk has one assist. Sure, it's nice to be able to get some help from the lower lines, but how long can either team keep this up?

* Can Detroit cut down on giveaways? They've had 24 through two games of this series, and they've been lucky to only give up one goal directly off them. You can't keep turning the puck over and assuming you can play your way out of that.

* How much does home ice help Chicago? They're 5-1 in the playoffs at home, in front of 22,600 screaming fans who have been waiting 14 years for a third-round home game. They have to be geared up for this. Meanwhile, the Red Wings are no strangers to playing in front of hostile territory.

* Finally, will Martin Havlat announce his presence with authority? The Blackhawks playoff scoring leader only has an assist. He needs to be lighting the lamp to show the way for the rest of this team.

Scheduled start time is 8:00 PM ET. Versus will carry the game in the U.S., while CBC takes over in Canada. We'll see you back here then.

Jeremy Roenick Calls Out Mike Babcock On Chris Chelios

joehass — Fri, 22 May 2009 13:58:41 -0000

Thursday morning, Jeremy Roenick was on a morning sports talk show (aside: wouldn't it be swell if Detroit had something like that? Oh, that's right...our "sports talk" station would rather focus on the "talk" part instead of the "sports" part. Sorry). He was talking about Chris Chelios and his limited playing time. His suggestion: Chelios isn't playing because Mike Babcock doesn't like him.

From this morning's Sun Times:

"The coach just doesn't like him for some ungodly reason," Roenick said. "I think he's got a grudge against American players, but he does not like Cheli at all. There's an underlying -- I don't know if it's a hatred because 'hate' is a strong word -- but there is some underlying issue that I don't understand."

Roenick doesn't expect Chelios to speak out about the matter.

"Cheli will never complain," Roenick said. "He is the ultimate professional. He will do whatever the team needs. But if you'd know some of the things that Babcock says to Chris Chelios, it would make your stomach churn. Just total disrespect for one of the best defensemen ever to play the game. ... I wish I could elaborate, but that's not proper. It's just disrespectful."

Okay, so let me get this straight. Chris Chelios, whom everyone and their mother knew going into this season was going to be on the trailing edge of the list of defensemen, isn't playing because Mike Babcock "has a grudge" against American players? But Roenick won't elaborate because "it's not proper"? So it's proper to call him out, but not proper to explain why?

Perhaps, and I'm just guessing here, Babcock is sticking with what works, and with the roster he thinks will give him the best chance at winning? While juggling injuries and other factors? And having a 47-year-old defenseman during playoff time who, while legendary and deserving of all accolades of a remarkable NHL career, is clearly low on the totem pole of a defensive squad, it may not be prudent to put him out there?

Put a sock in it, Jeremy.

From The Onion...

joehass — Thu, 21 May 2009 14:41:12 -0000

Even with these rule changes, I think the Red Wings are in a good place entering 2009-10.

NHL Tries To Woo Fans By Increasing Scoring With Bigger Nets, 3-Point Line

Blackhawks face big problems going home

joehass — Wed, 20 May 2009 13:01:44 -0000

Allow me to break out a sportswriting cliche.

Imagine if you're the Blackhawks and you're told the following about the first two games of this series prior to them being played:

Marian Hossa, Nicklas Lidstrom, and Pavel Datsuyk would be held ~~pointless~~ goalless in both games.
The Red Wings would commit 11 giveaways in Game 1 and 13 in Game 2.
Nikolai Khabibulin would make 42 saves in Game 1 and 38 in Game 2.
Chris Osgood would continue his streak of allowing at least one power-play goal in each game.
In fact, the Red Wings performance would be reasonably described as "adequate" both nights. They didn't look like world beaters.

You'd take it, wouldn't you? You'd figure at worst it'd be a spilt.

Instead, the Blackhawks head back to the United Center down 2-0. Dan Cleary has turned into a scoring machine. The third and fourth lines for the Wings are suddenly doing very good impersonations of first-liners.

Meanwhile, there's still a courtesy page out for Patrick Kane, who at least took three shots in Game 2 and was on the ice for 19:25 (leading all non-defensemen). I know plus-minus isn't the greatest stat in hockey, but when you're -5, that's not exactly a ringing endorsement of your performance.

Here's the depressing part of this for the Blackhawks: they could've easily won game 2, and I can make a reasonable claim that the Blackhawks had a pretty good chance in Game 1. They weren't blown out of the building.

But this is the struggle with a young team that's never been here before...they don't know what to do with it. It's not so much a deer in the headlights feeling Joel Quenneville's team has displayed as much as not taking advantage of the chances provided to them.

Mike Babcock realizes this. Don't think he's not reminding his players during the extra off day that they need to tighten up big time. They're playing good enough to win against a team that looks overmatched.

Before this series, I thought this would be similar to the 1987 Eastern Conference Finals between the Detroit Pistons and Boston Celtics. But after two games, it looks more like the 1987 Cambell Conference Finals between the Red Wings and the Edmonton Oilers. That year, the Red Wings shocked the Toronto Maple Leafs to win the Norris Division playoff title and set up a series against the Oilers. There was this sense of "Why not us, why not now?"

One little problem: The Oilers, who had been winning quite regularly over the previous few years with Gretzky, Messier, Fuhr, et al, administered a five-game beatdown of the Wings.

This bodes well for the Wings now. But you get the sense that the Blackhawks, who are here far earlier than anyone expected, will learn greatly from it.

Just not fast enough to win this series.

[Game Thread] Red Wings vs. Blackhawks Game 2

joehass — Tue, 19 May 2009 14:33:01 -0000

The Red Wings and Blackhawks meet up in Game 2 of the Western Conference Finals tonight at Joe Louis Arena. The Red Wings lead the series 1-0 after their 5-2 win Sunday.

A couple items to watch coming into this game:

* Will Joel Quenneville give more ice time to his phenoms Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews? In Game 1, Kane finished with 15:13 in 23 shifts and no shots, while Toews had 14:45 in 22 shifts. Both finished at -3. While you can argue that it's their first playoffs in the spotlight, the phrase "Baptism By Fire" comes to mind. Kane said Monday that "I'm not out there to be blocking shots and fighting guys." This was immediately followed by the observation that the sun continues to rise in the east.

* How much more can Nikolai Khabibulin do? The Blackhawk defense was porous in Game 1, giving up 43 shots. Khabibulin was the sole reason the Blackhawks were still in the game late. Surely Quenneville discussed defense with his team yesterday.

* Chris Osgood was good but not great in Game 1. The first Blackhawk goal was very sloppy. On a couple of plays Osgood came so far out of the net, a Blackhawks player was behind him with an open shot.

* The parade of line changes we saw in Game 1 for Mike Babcock may continue. It's not quite a random draw, but it sure does feel like it.

* Finally, Detroit has to be more careful with giveaways. The edge was 6-0 after the first period, ending up with 11-1 in the game. You can get away with sloppy play sometimes, but not all the time.

Game time is 7:30 p.m. ET on Versus (US) and TSN (Canada). See you back here then.