Chicago Blackhawks v Detroit Red Wings - Game Three

Last season during the Stanley Cup Playoffs, I put out a morning “noteworthy” column in the style of Trey Kerby’s “Things Of Note” posts on The Basketball Jones. This year I’ll be doing something similar (I think with some upgrades on my own previous attempts) using the NHL’s morning press release (“Stanley Cup of Joe,” they’re calling it), my own opinions, and some videos, .GIFs and appropriate pictures. Quoted passages are from the NHL press release.

***

Surprising

Last night the Detroit Red Wings took down the Chicago Blackhawks for a second straight game to move ahead 2-1 in the series.

Viktor Stalberg almost died

Or at least almost ended up paralyzed. He managed to play nearly 10 minutes in the contest, which isn’t so bad considering this happened on his first shift:

Ughhh.

Also suffering

Dan Cleary took an ill-timed little cross-check in the lower back from Brent Seabrook which unfortunately – though comically – changed the route his was taking, putting the net in his path.

Rock Solid

Jimmy Howard became the first Red Wings goaltender in 26 years to face 40 or more shots and yield only one goal in a playoff victory. The last time a Detroit netminder pulled off that feat was on April 12, 1987, when Greg Stefan made 46 saves in a series-clinching 3‑1 win over the Blackhawks in Game 4 of the Norris Division Semifinals. (Elias)

Murderers

Because like Fabolous’ girl, they be killin’ em:

Chicago killed off all five of Detroit’s power-play opportunities and is now a perfect 29-for-29 on the penalty kill in eight games this postseason. That matches the longest streak of consecutive games without allowing a power-play goal to begin a playoff year in the NHL’s expansion era (since 1967-68). St. Louis also didn’t yield a power-play goal in its first eight games of the 2001 Stanley Cup Playoffs (33-for-33). (Elias)

Speed kills

I thought Detroit’s quicker forwards – guys like Gustav Nyqvist and Justin Abdelkader – presented huge problems for Chicago’s D last night, on more than just the goals. But in some cases, the speed-to-success connection was more obvious:

Blackhawks yay goal

After Detroit scored twice in 30 seconds (Drew Miller followed up the above goal by jamming one home), the following happened. Should it have been a penalty on the play against Franzen at the start of the shift? Maybe. Was Keith’s pass an intentional backhand alley-oop to Kane? Probably. Was Kane’s subsequent battle win and finish excellent? Definitely.

Blackhawks nay goal

Right after that goal the Blackhawks’ push continued, including the goal below…that got waved off. Goaltender interference was the call, despite Shaw not actually touching Howard. Soft, soft call from where I sit. And I may have just misspelled “wrong.”

Poppin’ bottles

Datsyuk entirely changed the tone of the game when he put the Wings up 3-1 after that with a shot that looked almost exactly like one he scored on the Ducks in round one.

The key

The Red wings are 25-0-3 when scoring three (or more) goals this season. How bout that?

The Blackhawks had beat the Wings four straight games in Detroit prior to last night.

Home sweet home

Home teams improved to 40-18 (.690) in the 2013 Stanley Cup Playoffs, including a 10-1 record (.909) in the second round. Last year, home teams won only 39 of 86 games (.453) in the entire postseason.

The last time home teams had a winning percentage of .600 or higher during the Stanley Cup Playoffs was in 1993, when they went 52-33 (.612).

Tonight’s Action

Boston @ NY Rangers, Game 3, BOS leads 2-0, 7:30 p.m., NBCSN, TSN, RDS
Los Angeles @ San Jose, Game 4, LA leads 2-1, 10:00 p.m., NBCSN, TSN, RDS

Comments (9)

  1. A soft, wrong call indeed. Two blunders by the referees (Franzen no-call as well) with the latter being an obvious (?) make-up call. Still, a great effort by the Red Wings who have started showing their depth which they were not supposed to have, according to some renown podcasters ;) At least in comparison to the Blackhawks.

    The Datsyukian wrist-rocket is something I will never get tired of. I bet his writs shot is faster and stronger than slap shots of many other players. Add the accuracy to it and the goals keep coming. At least one goal like that per round could really boosts the morale of the team. They hung in there last night but should be ready for another wave on Thursday. The Hawks are not giving up that easily.

  2. You don’t need to make contact with the goalie to have it be a ‘no goal’ due to goaltender interference. The rulebook makes this abundantly clear under Rule 69 and in Table 18 Section 5D. That was an easy call, and the right one.

    • 5D: “An attacking player plants himself within the goal crease, as to obstruct the goalkeeper’s vision and impair his ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored.”

      While you are correct, that you don’t need to physically interfere with the goaltender to have the goal disallowed, you are incorrect about the usage of 5D to make this a ‘no-goal’. Shaw was never obstructing Howard’s vision, was never blocking his line of sight, as can be seen in the overhead view. If anything it’s Colaiacovo obstructing his vision.

    • yep, that’s sure what the rulebook says. However, it’s VERY rarely (nearly NEVER) called unless there is contact made, which is why it’s frustrating they chose to call it in a playoff game, where there was no contact, and Shaw was in front of the net, while the shot came from nearly along the goal line.

  3. If Stalberg’s goal should have counted, I would like credit for about 100 playoff goals disallowed for the same, perhaps even more frivolous crease violations.

  4. Where’s the love for the amazing sens comeback??? Surely that is noteworthy, looking on the blog its almost as if it didn’t even happen.

  5. Hey Chicago,

    Welcome to the party pal!

    Now that Holmstrom has retired, it’s nice to know that phantom goalie interference calls still exist!

    In the past the Wings could look forward to almost one of those a game in the playoffs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *