Tag Archives: brian rafalski

Spectacular Finish to a Great Hockey Tournament.

Before the beginning of the 21st Olympic Winter Games, most hockey experts predicted it would be the greatest hockey tournament ever held. At the end of yesterday’s spectacular gold medal game, the experts were right.

What a spectacular hockey game yesterday. Sidney Crosby scored the winner midway through the overtime period to give Team Canada a 3-2 win over the United States in exactly what a gold medal hockey game should be. Fast, tough, skilled, brilliant, close.

Winnipeg’s Jonathan Toews, a tournament all-star, scored Canada’s first goal, Corey Perry scored the second and the Canadian defence hung in long enough to allow Canada’s greatest young player to win it.

As a result of that game, Canada finished the Vancouver Games with a national record 26 medals: an Olympic record 14 golds, seven silvers and five bronze medals, good for third place in the medal race and tops in golds. And it came to end after one of the finest hockey games ever played.

Interestingly, Crosby was the hero yesterday, but no one had any doubt that U.S. goalie Ryan Miller was the best player in the tournament.

While Crosby’s overtime winner gave Canada a wonderful victory, Miller was named the tournament’s most valuable player and the best goaltender in the Olympics. Miller also made the final tournament All-Star team alongside teammates Brian Rafalsk and Zach Parise, Canada’s Toews and Shea Weber and Slovakia’s Pavol Demitra.

Once again, it was a sensational gold medal game — a sensational game that ended a sensational tournament. Twenty years from now, you’ll remember where you were when Sid the Kid scored the winner.

Bravo.

Despite the officials’ odd calls and the media’s cheers, Wings on the verge of Stanley Cup. Game 4: Detroit 2, Pittsburgh 1.

Congratulations to referees Mark Joannette and Brad Watson. It was apparent from the opening faceoff that if Joannette and Watson could get the Pittsburgh Penguins enough power play opportunities, the Pens could win Game 4 of the Stanley Cup final and send the series back to Detroit all even at 2-2.

 

So Joannette and Watson did their jobs. Dallas Drake, Brian Rafalski, Kris Draper, Brett Lebda and Johan Franzen were all sent to the penalty box in the first period. Sure, their infractions were penalties — well, sort of — but the fact that most of the stuff was going both ways didn’t have any effect on the officials’ inexorable march toward complete homerism.

 

Sadly — what happens in these situations as often as as not — the Pens didn’t co-operate. Even though only three Penguins were penalized (gotta make it look good, right?), the game was still tied 1-1 after 20 minutes. Sure, Pittsburgh got that big power-play goal to open the scoring, but somehow, at even strength, Nicklas Lidstrom tied it. Damn that even strength.

 

Now, let’s be fair, the officials certainly couldn’t be criticized. After all, they bought into the media hype. They bought into the league’s apparent delight in having Pittsburgh tie up the series (a delight created by the mainstream media). They even bought into hockey’s latest myth — which is Gary Roberts according to Don Cherry. Heck, Joannette and Watson even gave the Penguins a two-man advantage for a minute and 26 seconds in the third period!. That’s unheard of in a Stanley Cup playoff game. 

 

Didn’t matter. The Red Wings were just too good. Detroit won Game 4, 2-1 on Saturday night. Despite fewer power-plays and NO two-man advantages, the Wings outshot Pittsburgh 30-23 and even outhit the bigger, younger Pens 35-33.

 

Even though Detroit had eight minor penalties to Pittsburgh’s five in the first, even though the Pens had a long two-man advantage in the third, it didn’t matter. Even on the other guy’s ice, the Red Wings were just too good.

 

The Pens had everything going for them on Saturday: Home ice advantage, a place where they’d won nine straight in the playoffs; an international mainstream media that was virtually leading their cheers; a coach who had been given hours of meeting time with the NHL’s brass so he could whine about obstruction calls; more power play opportunities (6-3); and even Sidney Crosby (the NHL’s real “latest myth”).

 

And still they couldn’t outplay a President’s Trophy-winning Red Wings team that is destined to win the Cup. 

 

Again, I couldn’t care less who wins this thing (Detroit? Pittsburgh? Doesn’t affect my life), but after awhile, this media cheerleading for the Penguins has become annoying. C’mon guys. 

 

In Game 3, Marc-Andre Fleury was spectacular and Crosby was out there almost by himself. No question, those were brilliant performances. 

 

But in every other aspect of Game 3, Detroit was clearly the better team. There was really no reason to believe that Pittsburgh was suddenly going to get back in the series. Crosby got away from Draper et al and scored twice and Fleury stood on his head, but that was it. Evgeni Malkin was invisible (again). The Pittsburgh defence was confused. This “awesome” forecheck and “fearsome” hitting (the media’s words) got them a meagre 24 shots and they were barely in the game in the third period.

 

Saturday night, despite every reason to believe the Penguins had been handed a playoff game on a platter by two officials who really got caught up in the hype, Pittsburgh fell at home. Now, in four playoff games, Detroit has outshot the Penguins 134-88 (36-19, 34-22, 34-24, 30-23).

 

Everybody likes a good story and the Pittsburgh Penguins are a good story. But if you like a good (great?) hockey team, the Detroit Red Wings proved how good they were despite all odds on Saturday night. 

 

Ongoing Perfection. Game 2: Detroit 3 Pittsburgh 0.

Hard to imagine the Detroit Red Wings could be better in Game 2 of the 2008 Stanley Cup final than they were in Game 1, but it seems that just when you think you have the Wings figured out, they shift into another gear.

 

Monday night at Joe Louis Arena, the Wings made the Pittsburgh Penguins look as silly as, ohh, penguins.

 

In fact, Pittsburgh was so out of this one that even though they managed to get more shots on net in Game 2 than they did in Game 1, most of the shots were unscreened dump-ins from the blueline.

 

Meanwhile, Detroit plays the game the way Minnesota Wild assistant general manager Tom Thompson always wanted his hockey team to play.

 

“It’s like the difference between European hockey and Canadian hockey in the 70s,” Thompson once said. “In Canada, we always wanted to shoot the puck into the opposing zone. Our theory was, if it’s in your zone, you can’t score. In Russia, their theory was, it doesn’t matter what zone it’s in, if we have the puck you can’t score. That’s the way Detroit plays. They always have the puck.” 

 

Last night, playing that frustrating puck-possession style, the Red Wings took 34 shots at Marc-Andre Fleury while holding Pittsburgh to 22, mostly weak ones. There were times when Chris Osgood must have thought he was sitting on his porch having a lemonade as he watched the traffic go by. 

 

Ozzie now has two straight shutouts to start this year’s final. That’s only happened on three other occasions — Clint Benedict of the Montreal Maroons in 1926, Frank McCool of the Leafs in 1945 and Martin Brodeur of the Devils in 2003. That’s pretty good company.

 

Of course, to give credit where it’s due, the Red Wings shutout heroics start with a defence that has been all but impenetrable. Nicklas Lidstrom, Brad Stuart, Brian Rafalski and Niklas Kronwall have been particularly good and the relentless checking of Henrik Zetterberg, Pavel Datsyuk, Tomas Holmstrom, Kris Draper, Dan Cleary and Johan Franzen has certainly given the Wings control of the neutral zone.

 

Meanwhile, the Penguins have spent more time marching to the penalty box than they have toward the Red Wings net. This March of the Penguins is not what Pittsburgh fans had in mind.

 

Of course, Pittsburgh fans probably thought Evgeni Malkin was going to show up (he was minus-2 with no shots on goal last night).

 

If the Penguins didn’t have Sidney Crosby, the outcome would be worse than a 2-0 deficit, two straight shutout losses and two straight embarrassments.   

 

Game 3 is Wednesday night in Pittsburgh. The Pens will have to win one of the next two to force a return to Detroit. They should get at least a split at home.

But then again, based on the first two games of this series, there is no guarantee. 

 

Why I like the Red Wings to win the 2008 Stanley Cup final

ChrisChelios Why I like the Red Wings to win the 2008 Stanley Cup finalThere is little doubt that most Canadian hockey fans — and perhaps just plain old hockey fans in general — have fallen in love with the Pittsburgh Penguins. Most polls out there would suggest that the majority of fans in this country will be cheering wildly for the Pens, although not necessarily booing Detroit at the same time.

 

It’s pretty hard not to like the Wings, and most fans know that they’re in for a great Stanley Cup final regardless of which team wins. While most fans are cheering for the younger, although only equally as exciting Penguins, I continue to have a problem picking Pittsburgh to win the series.

 

In fact, I look at Pittsburgh as the 1983 Edmonton Oilers. Oh, man, they were good, but they just weren’t quite ready to unseat the New York Islanders as masters of hockey’s domain. The Isles beat the Oil in ’83, but Edmonton came back to create a dynasty of its own starting in 1984.

 

The Penguins have a chance to be a hockey dynasty. But not just yet.

 

Here’s why I like the Red Wings…

 

(1) They have 11 guys who have won the Cup before and in total, they have 24 rings in their locker room.

 

(2) The Wings are the President’s Trophy winners which means they’ve been at the top of their game for an entire season and for three rounds of the playoffs. Just like the Oilers in 1983, a team that went 11-1 through the first three rounds of the playoffs, Pittsburgh has played only 14 games (12-2) to reach the final. Trouble was, the Oilers lost that final in ’83 and so, too, will the Pens in ’08. 

 

(3) The Wings are considerably better — not just a little better but considerably better — than the three teams Pittsburgh beat to reach the final.

 

(4) Defensively, Detroit is the only team with the ability to shut down Pittsburgh’s high-powered offence. Nicklas Lidstrom, Brad Stuart, Nicklas Kronwall and Brian Rafalski can shut down Pittsburgh’s two potent top lines.

 

(5) Detroit can score. Sure, the Pens have Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin and Marian Hossa, but Detroit has Henrik Zetterberg, Pavel Datsyuk, Tomas Holmstrom and Johan Franzen (if he’s healthy). The two teams match up nicely, but Pittsburgh’s defensive units will have their hands full with the Detroit forwards.

 

(6) Detroit has home ice advantage and they don’t lose at home very often. 

 

(7) The Wings are in the final for the fifth time in 13 years. They have more experience (46-year-old Chris Chelios has two Cups and virtually a lifetime of experience) and more poise. Not to mention all those rings.

 

OK, so I worry about Chris Osgood and I wonder if the Detroit power-play is as good as the Pittsburgh power-play, but that’s all I worry about.

 

Pittsburgh will start reeling off a few Cups — next year. This year, the Red Wings win in six.