You Know What's A Sad Movie? Brian's Song: Stars 4 - Red Wings 3
It really was: if you can watch that movie without crying, then you have no soul. I guess in a way, that's kind of like the game tonight. The Dallas Stars came to the Joe less than 24 hours after beating the Columbus Blue Jackets, and the Wings should have taken full advantage of a tired, road-weary team. What happened was the Wings allowed the Stars to hang around, and ultimately a few mistakes were the Wings' downfall as they dropped a 4-3 decision to the Stars in OT.
The Red Wings opened the first with some jump, getting out to a 2-0 lead on goals by Pavel Datsyuk (on the power play) and Patrick Eaves. Unfortunately, a bad bounce went against the Wings as Brad Richards' shot bounced passed Chris Osgood to make it 2-1, and then the Stars capitalized on a power play of their own to make it 2-2. The first period ended with a flurry of penalties, and the Wings were able to kill off an extended 4-on-3 penalty. The rest of the second was a back and forth affair, and Chris Osgood made a big save late in the period to keep it tied. Johan Franzen scored a Budd Lynch special when he shot a puck under Tomas Holmstrom's arm to give the Wings a 3-2 lead. The Stars took full advantage of a Brian Rafalski giveaway with 3 minutes left in the third period to tie the game at 3. It went to OT, and Rafalski's rough night continued with a penalty for tripping Mike Louganis Ribeiro. The Wings were able to kill that off, but with less than a minute left in OT, Rafalski was caught on a pinch, leading to a 3-on-1 the other way. Loui Eriksson put home the winner, and that was all she wrote.
It's been a few hours since the game ended, and I'm still pretty upset. Follow me after the jump for the bullets.
- First things first: I'm pissed for Chris Osgood. Like everybody else, I wanted him to get his 400th win tonight. Things were set up for it to happen: at home against a team he has beaten more than anyone else (tied with Chicago), behind a team that played poorly in their last outing, and against a team that had played the night before. The Wings jumped out to a 2-0 lead, then it all went down the tubes. The first goal was a bad bounce off of Stuart's foot, and that happens (the Wings got a gift themselves when the puck went off Grossman's butt). The second goal may or may not have been tipped, but it's stoppable. The third goal? Rafalski had the awful giveaway to start that play (more on him in a moment), but any time a goal goes in the net along the ice between the goalie's legs, that's one that should have been stopped. The OT goal was a 3-on-1 rush down the ice, but the puck went in short side, and I thought it was another stoppable shot. He had some big saves, and I don't put this loss on Osgood, but he could have come up with a big save late in the game to preserve a win.
- You think Brian Rafalski wishes he could replay the last 5 minutes of regulation and OT? Even Ericsson hasn't been that bad this year. His giveaway directly led to the tying goal, he took a penalty in OT that thankfully was killed off, and then it was his pinch that allowed the odd-man rush to go the other way. I have a number in mind on what his CSSI is going to be (I'm not going to post it now because the CSSI hasn't been posted yet), but it's definitely a negative number. That was probably the worst stretch by a Wing defenseman all year, and if there's a "goat" tonight, it was him.
- You know who was good, though? Johan Franzen. He had a goal and an assist, he was throwing his body around, he had 3 shots on goal, and he was responsible defensively for the most part as well. We called him out around here after the Hawks game, and he responded with a good effort.
- For Christmas, I'm going to get Darren Helm the gift of a finishing touch. He had a great game drawing a penalty and killing penalties, but he had an opportunity to score late in the second period that he could not put home. It seems like he has one of these a night, and if he ever learns how to bury these chances, he's going to develop into a great two-way centerman.
- Andrew Raycroft played for the Stars tonight, and he was good, but not great. He made 28 saves, but none of them were of the spectacular variety. I didn't think the Wings really made him work for the victory. At one point in the broadcast, they mentioned that he won the Calder Trophy in 2004 as rookie of the year, and all that did was prove that winning the Calder is not indicative of future success (for further reading see: Jackman, Barret and Myers, Tyler).
That game really made me mad. After they lost to the Hawks, and after a lot of games, I've had the feeling that it just wasn't the Wings night and/or the other team was better. Tonight, this was a very winnable game that the Wings let get away from them. They should have won, and it was their own ineptitude that led to the defeat. They had a 2-0 lead midway through the first period, yet Dallas came back to tie the game. They scored late in the second to take a 3-2 lead going into the third, a lead they held for the first 17 minutes of the period, only to have a bonehead play by Rafalski lead to the tying goal. Then in OT, they took a penalty, and while they killed it off, that was the only good thing they did. They had a grand total of zero shots on goal during the OT, hardly the sign of a team that was gunning for a win. This game reminded me of any number of performances last year, and that's why I'm so angry. The Wings will be looking back at this game at the end of the year and will probably still be kicking themselves for letting a point get away. They still lead the conference by 1 point over the Stars while maintaining that important game-in-hand, but the lead should be 4 points. This one is going to be tough to get over.
The Wings actually get a couple of days off, and they welcome the Canucks to town on Wednesday, followed immediately by a date against the Blues before the Wings enjoy their Christmas break. A couple of wins going into the holiday will make everyone's Christmas a little more joyful.
37 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
If I were Babcock, every practice I’d set up a cardboard goalie cutout in front of the net, drop a hundred pucks on the ice, and tell Helm he couldn’t get off the ice until he shot every one into the net.
I don’t agree about Ozzie. The OT goal was kind of weak, but the second goal absolutely was deflected, and as for the third goal, if you put a shooter in front of the goalie with no pressure, any given goalie is only going to be able to keep it out 50 percent of the time.
I place this lost on Rafalski’s mistakes and not being able to finish the chances we had in the second and third.
Bullplop.
Not Helm. You’re on to something there. HA!
But 50% of the time? That’s horseshit. A good goaltender has the edge ALWAYS — a “HALL OF FAME” goaltender has an even greater edge.
I’m tired of everyone making excuses for this albatross of a goaltender. It’s ALWAYS someone else’s fault (this time, Rafalski apparently). Tell me, then, when ARE we allowed to pin one on Saint Chris?
He may not have lost this game — and he certainly didn’t lose it on his own. But he also didn’t win it. A sentiment we should all be used to by now.
by Michael Petrella on Dec 19, 2010 10:18 PM CST up reply actions
And I don't mean to pick on you...
Just trying to offer a differing viewpoint — don’t want you to think I’m lining you up in the cross-hairs.
by Michael Petrella on Dec 19, 2010 10:37 PM CST up reply actions
I'm with Petrella here
First, let me say that I do not blame Osgood solely for this loss. He made a couple of big stops (one late in the 2nd when it was 2-2 and another early in the third when it was 3-2), but that third goal was stoppable. The puck got passed him along the ice between his legs, and if he’s got his stick down, he stops the puck. The OT goal was also stoppable: on an odd-man rush, he’s supposed to he squared up to the shooter, and the puck went in short-side. That should not happen.
I like Osgood. I’m very upset that he didn’t get 400 tonight, and the team in front of him (specifically Rafalski) did very little to help him out. But to Petrella’s point: if Osgood is a HOF goalie (as some people think he is), then he makes the big save at a point in the game to either preserve a victory late in the third or keep the game going in OT, and he didn’t do that. Imagine how great it would have been for us to be talking about the huge save that Osgood made on Morrow late in the third. Unfortunately, he didn’t come up with that stop, and we’re talking about how a game got away from the Wings.
by Amerinadian on Dec 19, 2010 10:47 PM CST up reply actions
So, Brodeur has never EVER lost a game like that?
Or Roy? Or any other HOF goalie in existence? And why do folks get so upset with Ozzie when Howard’s play has been equally (or moreso) as spotty as Ozzie’s lately? I don’t see people give scathing indictments on Howard.
It’s no secret Ozzie hasn’t played well since the 2009 cup run. But I find it a wee-bit unfair to point to one game or any of the past year and say “See? Not HOF material to me.”
If Brodeur's lost a game like that, it hasn't become the norm.
Okay, maybe it has now. =)
ONE GAME?! Whatever you’re smoking, I’d love to buy some.
If this was an anomaly, I’d be happy to say “aw shucks, friends, bad game, we’ll get ’em next time.” THIS has become what to expect of Chris Osgood games. Perhaps my expectations of losing each time he starts makes me a bad Red Wing fan. Perhaps it makes me realistic.
by Michael Petrella on Dec 19, 2010 10:56 PM CST up reply actions
Forgetting the way he played the previous two games isn’t very realistic.
Yeah, I know… stoppable shots by Kopitar and Eriksson. Somehow, the best pure shooter on two teams found a way to get a puck past our backup goalie after a huge mistake by the people playing in front of him.
Chris Osgood gives up 0.05 more goals per game than Jimmy Howard and we’re tearing our backup to pieces.
by J.J. from Kansas on Dec 19, 2010 11:00 PM CST up reply actions
Fair enough
I look at it this way: had this been the other way around, and it was Jimmy in net tonight instead of Osgood, my recap would probably have been the same: nothing you can really do about the first two, the third one was hit or miss, but the fourth one was stoppable.
by Amerinadian on Dec 19, 2010 11:04 PM CST up reply actions
I'm with JJ
Osgood has looked like our best goalie since he came back from injury. Take that statement as you will.
But to say this one game is proof he isn’t HOF material, ESPECIALLY since the only active player on the list ahead of him is having a TERRIBLE season, seems like a specious argument.
by Big Z in Orlando on Dec 21, 2010 12:12 PM CST up reply actions
Never? Of course not
But I’ll bet you that they make a save in that moment more often than any other goalie. And I’m still not blaming this loss on Osgood. I also never said he’s not “HOF material” at all. There are those who believe that he belongs in the HOF (for the record, I’m one of them). However, I believe that he had a chance to make a save tonight that could have gotten the Wings a victory and he didn’t. Now, the tying and winning goals don’t happen without brain farts by Rafalski, and Brian is my #1 reason tonight why the Wings lost the way they did.
As for Jimmy, I’ve pointed out in my recaps (and JJ has noted in his CSSI) that he hasn’t played well lately. The Wings have won a couple of games this year in spite of Jimmy, not because of him. He’s give up some soft goals, and some people (myself included) have admitted that if it were Osgood giving up those goals, we’d be all over him, so we do the same to Jimmy. However, Howard’s still working with some of the currency he built up from his play during the stretch run last year leading up to the playoffs, and he was good early this year. If he continues to be hot-and-cold, I fully expect Wing fans to call him on it.
by Amerinadian on Dec 19, 2010 11:01 PM CST up reply actions
i was so pissed after the game
That I went to a walmart supercenter 30 miles away to plunder a pack of gum
I celebrate Festivus!!!
by bharatwaj5 on Dec 19, 2010 9:54 PM CST via mobile reply actions
Rafalski/Franzen
Sneak peek for the CSSI post going up tomorrow – Rafalski had the worst adjusted plus/minus.
Somewhat surprising fact: he was only -0.5 worse than 2nd-worst. He might surprise you.
by J.J. from Kansas on Dec 19, 2010 10:11 PM CST reply actions
I’m guessing Datsyuk – he had a few turnovers tonight.
by Amerinadian on Dec 19, 2010 10:48 PM CST up reply actions
Thank you for the scathing indictment of Chris Osgood.
For a few minutes there, I thought I was going to be floating alone in my hatred of his play today. Atrocious.
Two were deflected, and the final was on a three-on-two, but if he’s an alleged Hall of Fame goaltender (he isn’t), he needs to make a few stops you don’t expect… not have excuses made for him EVERY FUCKING TIME he’s in the net.
by Michael Petrella on Dec 19, 2010 10:16 PM CST reply actions
I didn’t expect him to make that stop from on his ass in the third period.
I’ve said that he had a chance to win it, but didn’t in half of his losses this season (2 of 4).
I remember specifically saying the same thing in three of Jimmy’s 9 losses.
I think we have a pretty good setup as far as which goalie is our starter and who’s our backup. To answer your question above, we’ll pin one on Saint Chris when the team plays well in front of him and loses because he cost them the game, not because of two deflections and a guy left all alone right in front of him. I think we all did a pretty good job of pinning it on him when he gave up three in the first period against Phoenix, including that short-handed softie.
by J.J. from Kansas on Dec 19, 2010 10:52 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I'm sorry, dude, I'm just tired of this game every time he plays.
I promised myself LAST time I’d stop getting into this because everyone’s firmly made up their minds about Chris Osgood. I’m not going to change anyone’s minds, so I should just shut up. Likewise, I should stop getting so agitated when someone attempts to defend him because I simply won’t agree.
He made some great saves tonight. I’m happy to concede that. That glove save going right to left was pretty dope. But if the Wings have to expect to score five because he’s playing, that’s not a good goaltender.
Also, is your biggest minus of the game Zetterberg?
by Michael Petrella on Dec 19, 2010 11:00 PM CST up reply actions
Just to change the subject
Biggest minus other than Rafalski was Franzen.
His slashing penalty was a very big mistake and the biggest error on the OT goal was his, not Rafalski’s.
Looking at the replay, Raffi and Franzen switched places when Franzen passed it to Rafalski entering the zone. Raffi was playing net-front like the other forward’s job when Zetterberg drove the net. Franzen should have been back on defense. Instead, he chose to pinch at the scrum and let Benn beat him with a pass off the boards to Eriksson headed up ice. Also, Rafalski was the one hustling to get back, but Franzen didn’t make it back onto the screen.
by J.J. from Kansas on Dec 19, 2010 11:05 PM CST up reply actions
Haha
And here I talked up Franzen for playing a good game.
by Amerinadian on Dec 19, 2010 11:07 PM CST up reply actions
I went back and double-checked his game because I didn’t want to believe it, but he really faded late and really didn’t do much to drive the play enough to earn a bonus plus for his good work in the first period and his goal in the second.
If he gets the puck to Datsyuk sooner (or on net) on that 2-on-1, it’s probably a completely different story for him.
by J.J. from Kansas on Dec 19, 2010 11:11 PM CST up reply actions
He's been really hot and cold lately, I feel.
Such a dynamic offensive player who looks bored for whole games at a time. But, for the last few games, I’m having a damn hard time finding ANYONE that looks good. Ya know what I mean?
by Michael Petrella on Dec 19, 2010 11:13 PM CST up reply actions
Excellent analysis, as always.
I missed the pass off the boards from Benn. Looking forward to CSSI tomorrow am, like always, homey!
by Michael Petrella on Dec 19, 2010 11:07 PM CST up reply actions
Thanks, man
And double-thanks for putting up the loss candy before bedtime. Maybe dreams of Ms. Wilde can help allay the nightmares of Brenden Morrow’s forechecking..
by J.J. from Kansas on Dec 19, 2010 11:13 PM CST up reply actions
HA
It’s what I do…
Also, given our discussion here, I’d recommend you not reading the rest of the text. HAHAHA!
Oh, I fucking love you fellas.
by Michael Petrella on Dec 19, 2010 11:14 PM CST up reply actions
The feeling is mutual
I have to echo J.J.’s thoughts on the loss candy. The Princess was a nice addition to House (when I still watched it), and your posts make losing a little easier to take.
by Amerinadian on Dec 19, 2010 11:29 PM CST up reply actions
I was at the game and didn't see much of a mention on recaps...
Maybe b/c i missed the game thread… but Eaves looked absolutely amazing… not just his goal but his jump/finishing plays and checks. He was flying out there. Helm/Datsyuk/Abdelkader/Eaves were the 4 that stood out to me at the game. I also cringed and turned to my friend every time Rafalski touched the puck. He just hasn’t been the same since the injury i can’t quite put my finger on what it is. Furthermore – Ericsson has showed good progress and imo played like the 2nd/3rd best defenseman tonight —>
Finishing touch? - how about Cleary buckets seemed to have Many prime opportunities near the goal/ for tips etc. All in all it was very disheartening to be there, I was telling my buddy w/ about 12 minutes left- we’re stagnating and just becoming uber passive just look at the power play with 6 min left . I left with a sour taste that only taco bell could rectify :-/ oh well ; Ozzy deserved the win the crowd was amped for him
"A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day." ~ Calvin (C & H)
Osgood
but he could have come up with a big save late in the game to preserve a win
Am I the only one that saw that 4 on 3 in OT?
I mean, look at the last two goals. One came with their captain all alone sitting on the doorstep and the other came on a 3 on 1 break, both situations where you’d expect a goal. It’s not like he let one hit like this:
Or this one from...
…center ice. Oh wait.
I don’t think anyone is saying Osgood lost the game, but that given the accolades some of us think he deserves (e.g. HOF) he could/should have won that game. There were two stoppable pucks for sure.
Nonetheless, Osgood made some really big saves. So I’m a bit ambivalent on this one. I look at it like this: Osgood probably should have garnered us a victory (defensive lapses notwithstanding). But he’s not the reason we lost. So, unsure how to actually feel about Osgood here. But I’ll let others hash that out further, if need be.
I’m far more concerned about the inability of this team (lately) to outwork the opponent when it really matters. We should have never been in the position to lose that game. It should have been blown wide open earlier, and the defense should have clamped down much better in the late third. Our forecheck disappeared and that always makes it impossible to play the system.
They look a bit bored and uninspired. I know it’s still winter, but bad habits in December can make for bad results come playoff time.
After watching 2/3 periods last night and then going back and watching the WHOLE game this morning all i can say is: well, shit. Half of me wants to give credit where credit is due to the Stars but the other half thinks that we really crapped this one away. I think it’s a bit of both and it sucks that it had to come when Ozzie was going for #400 but it did, nothing we can do about it.
All I know is that if they don’t come out with a fire under their asses against Vancouver, it’s going to be a blowout. We can’t contain Tomas Kopecky, looks like the Sedin twins will be fun.
Some days you eat the puck
And sometimes the puck eats you.
Ozzie didn’t play very well last night and in the immortal words of Sid Abel "deetroi-it r not playing well at-all lately Bruce. "
Smitty
by Kendal on Dec 20, 2010 10:53 AM CST via mobile reply actions
Rafalski's Penalty
He may have been in the box, but if you watched the game, you know it was Franzen that made that trip. Rafalski had his stick around the guy, but Franzen took a chop at his legs and thats what toppled him. I think Franzen Slashes a way too much. Seems to get called for it a lot on sticks, this just happened to be legs.
Not that this excuses his terrible turnover that led to the GTG. I also half-forgive his pinch in OT. Tough break, but it could have just as easily led to the win
by OriginalRecipeIzzy on Dec 20, 2010 10:59 AM CST reply actions
Ribeiro was falling before Franzen’s stick made contact.
by J.J. from Kansas on Dec 20, 2010 11:10 AM CST up reply actions
Enough of this...I am looking forward to the next 15-0-0
hopefully..will happen from hereon in…starting next game…
Sigh***********
Utopia where art thou?
I celebrate Festivus!!!

by 
















