Did Franzen really get nothing for that? I watched the game here in British Columbia and I don't get it.
You are correct. He got no penalty at all. But, what Alex Steen did was a rough x2... I just don't get it. If you are going to call crap like that then you had best be calling it both ways. I don't want to turn this into another conspiracy thread but they make it so dam# hard not to when every night all around the league you see bs like this. Another example was the Reaves hit. He was shoulder to shoulder and the guy spun off the hit into the boards. Reaves could have run him in the numbers and really F'd his day up big time but he didn't. That was the worst call of the night by far. In the end the Blues sat back and let the wings climb back into the game instead of jamming the puck down their throat. I assure you there is nothing in this world that frustrates and enrages me more then watching the wings climb back into games and eeking out bs wins. I have said it my whole life... Nothing pisses me off more then the Redwings....
Talking to people who don't like the Blues can be annoying. They say Backes dived and that their team would have fought back. And call me a homer because I say that should have obviously been a penalty.
I just saw it for the first time and I thought he dived. Backes is pretty strong on his skates. A little jab to the face isn't going to knock him down.
But then Franzen gave him a legit punch to the face while he was on the ground. There should have been a penalty for that considering it cut Backes' chin.
Wings fan here.
The no call on Franzen was terrible. I do not know if there was something what led to it. But the Blues should of got PP there.
Other than that the game was great, very intense.
They played better and if it was a playoff game, we would have seen another period of hockey.
But they did show some youth after they got two goals, it's like they didn't expect Detroit to come after them. The really good teams that have a core that's been battle tested have another gear.
That's something this team hasn't developed yet but their core is young and still developing and that's why there is so much hope for the coming years.
I wish Hitchcock would have called a timeout after the 1st Red Wing goal. I think the whole team was so into the shutout streak, it kind of took the wind out of their sails. A TO there to get everyone refocused could have helped.
I wish Hitchcock would have called a timeout after the 1st Red Wing goal. I think the whole team was so into the shutout streak, it kind of took the wind out of their sails. A TO there to get everyone refocused could have helped.
He was probably doing what I was doing -- waiting for the under-10 minute media timeout. Don't think that came until after it was 2-2?
I wish Hitchcock would have called a timeout after the 1st Red Wing goal. I think the whole team was so into the shutout streak, it kind of took the wind out of their sails. A TO there to get everyone refocused could have helped.
It DEFINITELY took the wind out of my sails. We played so great last night. Hard one to swallow not coming off the ice with 2 points.
It is slightly discouraging when you look at our record. Won only 3 games of the last 10 played.
and about the whining:
there is always a call too less or too much, nothing special. sometimes it goes the one way, sometimes another way but it sucks that it seems that Detroit always can go the bright way, never the stony one
We haven't really had a bad stretch under Hitch. This is one of those stretches, it sucks it's coming so near the PO but idt for a second they're losing in the first round
I was very encouraged by how D'Agostini looked out there. I think these lines are going to be doable. Stewart on a line with Arnott just plays with confidence in the offensive zone that we haven't seen most of the season. I think he's going to be a contributor in the playoffs, and from a line that will have more limited minutes.
Polak still isn't quite up to his usual form, but I'm not concerned.
Overall the team played pretty well last night against a Detroit team that was bringing their "A" game. I wasn't impressed with the officiating. I am fine with them letting a lot of stuff go, but it needs to be called the same both ways and I don't think it was. Also didn't think that was a boarding call on Reaves, it was shoulder to shoulder.
I'm glad to be missing Detroit in round one. One of Nashville/Detroit is going to be out in a brutal series. I'd much rather face Chicago then Detroit, although Chicago is still a dangerous team. But the Blues have to prove they deserve it by beating good teams in the post-season if they think they are legit contenders.
They played better and if it was a playoff game, we would have seen another period of hockey.
But they did show some youth after they got two goals, it's like they didn't expect Detroit to come after them. The really good teams that have a core that's been battle tested have another gear.
That's something this team hasn't developed yet but their core is young and still developing and that's why there is so much hope for the coming years.
I agree. It's easy to forget how far the Blues still have to go relative to some other teams in the midst of their surprising success this season. This was supposed to be a "seasoning" year, not one where they were a legitimate threat to win the Cup. The Blues have put themselves in that position with a lot of hard work, but they still have a few lessons to learn to get to that truly elite level IMO. That usually, but not always, takes a significant amount of time and disappointment amidst raised expectations.
My personal expectations are for the Blues to make it out of round one and put up a good strong fight in round two. Just put up a solid effort that legitimizes what they accomplished this year and that they can build off of for next year. Anything less than that will be disappointing, and anything more will be a nice bonus.
I was very encouraged by how D'Agostini looked out there. I think these lines are going to be doable. Stewart on a line with Arnott just plays with confidence in the offensive zone that we haven't seen most of the season. I think he's going to be a contributor in the playoffs, and from a line that will have more limited minutes.
Polak still isn't quite up to his usual form, but I'm not concerned.
Overall the team played pretty well last night against a Detroit team that was bringing their "A" game. I wasn't impressed with the officiating. I am fine with them letting a lot of stuff go, but it needs to be called the same both ways and I don't think it was. Also didn't think that was a boarding call on Reaves, it was shoulder to shoulder.
I'm glad to be missing Detroit in round one. One of Nashville/Detroit is going to be out in a brutal series. I'd much rather face Chicago then Detroit, although Chicago is still a dangerous team. But the Blues have to prove they deserve it by beating good teams in the post-season if they think they are legit contenders.
I agree, D'Agostini had numerous chances out there, and was cycling and moving the puck very well. Kinda wish he got more ice time, but I guess Hitch is just easing him in after his injury. Stewart has looked better as well, although there was once instance where he could of drove wide on the defender but instead elected to drop the puck off to Jackman. If Stewart drives the net, he can probably get off a sick backhand, and not give Howard an easy save on Jackman's one timer.
That is a part of it. There is no denying the talent he has. but it also helped that Detroit was able to let him develop properly within the system. They didn't rush him into the line-up because they didn't have to.
The Blues are starting to get to that point with their young players. Berglund as well as a few others would have benefited from having a bit of time in the AHL to refine their games, but the Blues needed them at the NHL level to draw fans and because there wasn't much talent on the club at that time.
BY TOM TIMMERMANN stltoday.com | Posted: Thursday, April 5, 2012 1:49 pm LINK TO STORY
Quote:
HAZELWOOD -- Despite three straight losses and a 3-3-4 record in the past 10 games, the worst run of games for the Blues this season, and depsite blowing a 2-0 third-period lead against Detroit on Wednesday and losing 3-2 in a shootout, spirits were high on their last offday of the regular season.
To a man, the Blues felt they played well against Detroit for 50 or so minutes, after two less than stellar efforts against Chicago and Columbus.
...
The revised lines left Matt D'Agostini skating with the spares. While Alex Steen and Andy McDonald have jumped back into it after returning from injuries, D'Agostini hasn't.
"D'Agostini is an interesting dilemma," Hitchcock said, "because he's a guy for me from the red line in really brings an element that is necessary for us. From the red line back, he's missed so much time his awareness isn't up to speed. That's why we're working on the things we're working on in practice, to try to get him up to speed. There's going to be a time when we have to make a decision on what we're going to do with him. He's showing improvement. I just hope we don't run out of days."
I was somewhat surprised by this, he may not be in the lineup in the Playoffs after all.
Last edited by EastonBlues22: 04-05-2012 at 04:01 PM.
Reason: Posted entire story; Added link
Interestingly, Datsyuk early in his career was known as a playoff non-performer for a bunch of years. I really don't like the kind of lazy analysis that passed in JR's chat today. Namely, the Blues "played" for 54 minutes and then stopped "playing," whereas the Wings could afford to "play" for 6 minutes because they have the luxury of high end skill players. That was JR's take.
To me, that's an absurd synopsis of what happened last night. What we saw was two teams playing determinedly, with structure and intelligence and physicality, and then each team exploited two specific mistakes. The Blues did it first and then the Wings did it second. Both Perron and McDonald made great skilled plays, just like Datsyuk-to-Franzen.
I guess it's hard to hold complexity like that in our little sports heads, so we have to say stupid stuff like "the Blues played a 54-minute game," and "the Wings played for 6 minutes because they have the luxury of skilled players." Jesus, it's like a competition for lazy analysis and that's the entry.
