Red Wings

[Malto Marko]

Hey Chemi.

Wings lost 4-1 in the first game and looked like they did not belong.

Wings win 4-1 in the second game in Chicago.

What is your take?

[CaptainBlue]

Re: Red Wings

Hey Chemi.

Wings lost 4-1 in the first game and looked like they did not belong.

Wings win 4-1 in the second game in Chicago.

What is your take?

1. Wings were rested.
2. Finally a game at a normal time.
3. I brought them good luck by watching the entire game (kidding).

[Malto Marko]

1. Wings were rested.
2. Finally a game at a normal time.
3. I brought them good luck by watching the entire game (kidding).

Talking about having to travel to the west coast is supposed to be insignificant.

Wings learned how to do it but Ducks did not.

Wings had legs and desire in this game.

Wings won with rest and a mission.

[chemiclord]

Hey Chemi.

Wings lost 4-1 in the first game and looked like they did not belong.

Wings win 4-1 in the second game in Chicago.

What is your take?

That this is the sort of game they need to bring the rest of the way? Will they? I've seen no evidence the last two years that they are able to play at this level consistently.

And that's really been their problem. They'd have a stretch where they beat San Jose and Colorado, push Chicago to a shoot out... then drop a home and home to Columbus four days later. Take two on the road from Anaheim, then follow it up the next week with a thumping against the Sharks and a trucking by the Blackhawks. Win a critical game against Nashville... then fall asleep at the wheel against Calgary.

As for the rest (and travel issue), the only thing I've ever had to say on that is that it's not much of an excuse for losing. The Wings won 4 Cups in the Western Conference, and somehow managed to survive the gauntlet of West Coast trips along the way. If you have the talent to win, the travel isn't going to make you lose.

[FVD]

Yeah that 8pm start on Game 1 was a killer for them. Definitely a major factor in that loss

[Tom]

It looked like the teams switched jerseys near the end of the 2nd period.

The thing that made me nervous was that once they got the big lead, it looked like they were toying with the Hawks and Chicago couldn't get any pressure on Howard. While that sounds great, it seemed to take Howard out of his rhythm and when they did start getting through to him, he started to look a little shaky and make some weird decisions.

Anyway, it worked out and I hope they can keep this up. It looked like the old Wings back out on the ice.

[Malto Marko]

That this is the sort of game they need to bring the rest of the way? Will they? I've seen no evidence the last two years that they are able to play at this level consistently.

And that's really been their problem. They'd have a stretch where they beat San Jose and Colorado, push Chicago to a shoot out... then drop a home and home to Columbus four days later. Take two on the road from Anaheim, then follow it up the next week with a thumping against the Sharks and a trucking by the Blackhawks. Win a critical game against Nashville... then fall asleep at the wheel against Calgary.

As for the rest (and travel issue), the only thing I've ever had to say on that is that it's not much of an excuse for losing. The Wings won 4 Cups in the Western Conference, and somehow managed to survive the gauntlet of West Coast trips along the way. If you have the talent to win, the travel isn't going to make you lose.

Don't disagree at all regarding the consistency but, in a seven game series, they need to win 4 out of 7. While being inconsistent, this team seems to be able to win the games they must to stay alive.

I like their chances now that they stole one in Chicago but will admit they are likely to drop one of their home ice games.

[Fraquar]

Travel only really becomes an issue in the first game of a new series, where one team has been traveling like crazy the previous series and the other is sitting at home going through it's normal routine. That's what happened in Game 1, while the Red Wings were trying to find their legs the Black Hawks "skated them into the ice" (Babcock's own words).

Wings found their legs again, series on. No more crossing time zones, both teams on equal terms travel wise.

[The Cat]

They more than likely will lose game four. I have said all along the wings can't win game seven in chicago...they will have to win in six. The way to do it i to win back to back games twice. Take game three at the Joe, game five in chicago and six back at home. Chemi I don't think we can hang on to the inconsistency observation any longer. This team is much better than they were during the regular season. If they lose it will be a super human effort by Chicago.....Frankly the one thing that hasn't been talked about is coaching....Mike Babcock vs Joel Queneville,,,no contest and Babcock's role in this series will be enormous.

[Fraquar]

They can win the Cup if they can just keep those boneheaded turnovers to a minimum. Howard has been far better than that GAA suggests from what I've seen - a good portion of those goals were of the "no chance" variety because of the turnovers.

[Tony G]

They can win the Cup if they can just keep those boneheaded turnovers to a minimum. Howard has been far better than that GAA suggests from what I've seen - a good portion of those goals were of the "no chance" variety because of the turnovers.

More tempting fate!

[Malto Marko]

They more than likely will lose game four. I have said all along the wings can't win game seven in chicago...they will have to win in six. The way to do it i to win back to back games twice. Take game three at the Joe, game five in chicago and six back at home. Chemi I don't think we can hang on to the inconsistency observation any longer. This team is much better than they were during the regular season. If they lose it will be a super human effort by Chicago.....Frankly the one thing that hasn't been talked about is coaching....Mike Babcock vs Joel Queneville,,,no contest and Babcock's role in this series will be enormous.

I agree that a game 7 in Chicago seems insurmountable given Bettman would rather see the Hawks get to the Finals and that will be communicated informally to the officiating crews.

However, the wild card here is a group that is still finding themselves, have not given up and truly thinks they can persevere.

We have had good goal tending.

We are getting points out of younger players.

We have had good play from the top players (although it is time for the Mule to get on to the scoreboard).

I also agree with the philosophy on the Coaches but, don't forget. They have Scotty and I a guessing he has a direct line to the bench in this series.

Both sides have played well and poorly so far. It is the team that brings it for a full 60 that will end up moving on.

Bouncing pucks can also be a factor but, they don't bounce so good if you are not putting it on the net.

[chemiclord]

Don't disagree at all regarding the consistency but, in a seven game series, they need to win 4 out of 7. While being inconsistent, this team seems to be able to win the games they must to stay alive.

I like their chances now that they stole one in Chicago but will admit they are likely to drop one of their home ice games.

Here's the thing. Detroit can't assume their best effort is always going to be a win, not with a team like Chicago. Being at their best for 4 games I don't think is going to be enough. They are GOING to have to put together great games consistently to beat the Blackhawks.

[jaadam4]

If Z and Dats continue to control games and Howard plays well we can make it to the next round.

[Malto Marko]

Here's the thing. Detroit can't assume their best effort is always going to be a win, not with a team like Chicago. Being at their best for 4 games I don't think is going to be enough. They are GOING to have to put together great games consistently to beat the Blackhawks.

......and that is the way Playoff games should be.