OT: Red Wings Blues

Submitted by TheDirtyD on

After the first peroid the score is tied 0-0

The Wings looks to be playing better today. They look to actually have some effort.

MGoBoard

Wolverine Devotee

March 22nd, 2015 at 1:13 PM ^

If Red stopped playing Musical Goaltending Chairs, they would be fine.

Racine is CLEARLY the top goalie on this team. What more does he have to prove? Sometimes he gives up goals, but really, he doesn't get very much help from this D.

If Michigan sticks with Racine next year, they will make the tournament and then some. I guarantee it. 

Joined: 06/29/2009

MGoPoints: 31528

JonnyHintz

March 22nd, 2015 at 1:43 PM ^

Racine: .908 SV% 2.94 GAA Nagelvoort: .906 SV% 2.63 GAA Now typically, I don't like to rely on stats in hockey. But where in this do you see Racine being clearly the top goalie? The save percentage is relatively the same, but Racine allowed a lot more goals. Which only means Racine faced more shots. But a differential in saving .2% more of the shots doesn't scream CLEARLY the top goalie. Now I can agree that towards the end of the year, Racine was playing a bit better and he received the starts as a result. But Nagelvoort was clearly the better goalie early in the season. Starting Racine from the start wouldn't have yielded results any better than Nagelvoort. On the contrary, the results would have been worse. 6 times this season, Racine allowed 4 or more goals. 8 times he had a sub .900 SV%. Twice it was in the .600-.700 range. Even his .908 save percentage is a little skewed by his B1G Tournament appearance. In the B1G tournament he allowed 5 goals (1.67 GAA) on 87 shots (.945 SV%). As I said, he played well. But I his previous 2 starts (both against Penn State), he allowed 6 goals and stopped 86% of his shots and then allowed 4 goals and stopped 87.1% of his shots. Both losses that were must wins for Michigan contending for an at-large bid. Nagelvoort on the other hand played very well in the MSU series. Now I'm not trying to say Nagelvoort is clearly the better goalie. Let's not kid ourselves. Both goalies were bad. Red made the right choice in riding whichever goalie was hot at the time. The difference between .906 and .908 SV% is not the difference between making the tournament and not. Not to mention that PRIOR to the Big Ten Tournament, Nagelvoort had the advantage in both save percentage and goals against average. So I'd love to hear your argument on how starting a goalie who saves a lower percentage of his shots and allows more goals per game for an entire season would have resulted in better results and is making the tournament. This should be interesting.

Joined: 01/11/2015

MGoPoints: 48870

Wolverine Devotee

March 22nd, 2015 at 1:56 PM ^

Eye test.

Racine looks more comfortable. He saved 40 of 41 shots  against top-10 ranked MTU when Michigan was without their 4 best players who were at the WJCs.

I also haven't seen Racine give up goals as bad as Nagelvoort. 

Racine does have some bad games, but welcome to hockey when you have a defense that has been bad.

 

 

Joined: 06/29/2009

MGoPoints: 31528

JonnyHintz

March 22nd, 2015 at 3:36 PM ^

Eye test means absolutely nothing. Racine looking better, if that's even true as I don't exactly agree was true every game, simply doesn't produce results. Like it or not, a goalie who saves a higher percentage of his shots and allows fewer goals per game is what gives the team a better chance to win. There is no way around that. That's how it works. This is one of the few instances where statistics speak for themselves. A goalie looking good and passing the eye test doesn't beat out results. Results showed that prior to Racine having a stellar Big Ten Tournament, Nagelvoort was better in saves % and better in GAA. That is a fact. How can you possibly argue that more goals allowed and fewer percentage of shots saved will equal more wins? That's just asinine. At any rate, neither goalie was good. Regardless of who was starting, the results would have been the same. Red was right to ride the goalie who is hot at the time. You can talk about his GLI performance against Tech all you'd like, but what about his start a few games prior against that same Tech team where he allowed 5 goals on 16 shots? Racine had his moments where he was stellar, and had his moments where he was terrible. Same with Nagelvoort. Either way you go, you can't make an argument for either goalie being the #1 the whole season. I think you're taking his performance in the Big Ten Tourney and trying to justify that as his entire season's body of work. He was not good for the vast majority of the season. Him being the permanent starter all season would have put us in this exact spot. He wasn't better statistically than Nagelvoort. Where are you expecting the results to come from?

Joined: 01/11/2015

MGoPoints: 48870

JonnyHintz

March 22nd, 2015 at 3:44 PM ^

Racine has allowed 4 or more goals 6 times compared to 4 by Nagelvoort. Nagelvoort had 11 games with a sub .900 SV% compared to 8 by Racine. But Racine had two games with a sub .700 SV% compared to 0 by Nagelvoort. Both goalies were bad. But there is nothing definitive you can point to where Racine is "CLEARLY the better goalie," other than your "eye test," claim. Which means absolutely NOTHING in the game of hockey. You can look as good as you want out there. Look comfortable. But when you're not stopping the puck, you're not getting it done. Again, I'm not saying Nagelvoort should have been #1 all season long. But there is absolutely nothing that shows Racine being better. Nothing that tells me they shouldn't have split time. All you've been able to point to is the eye test.

Joined: 01/11/2015

MGoPoints: 48870

migblue

March 22nd, 2015 at 2:16 PM ^

Babcock wants to be the highest paid coach in the NHL. There's zero chance of him coaching at Michigan. His style of coaching does not suit us anyway. Michigan is a finesse team and Babcock loves playing grinder style hockey, which is ruining the Wings. I really miss the days when the Wings were fun to watch, without Datsyuk this team is boring. 

Joined: 03/20/2015

MGoPoints: 88

Achilles

March 22nd, 2015 at 1:04 PM ^

The Red Wings have been fucking themselves. They better start winning more or else they will be, yet again, a shitty 7 or 8 seed; or they might even miss the playoffs for the first time in 720 years.

Joined: 03/18/2015

MGoPoints: 1766

Trader Jack

March 22nd, 2015 at 1:31 PM ^

Can someone who has watched the Wings play a lot in their recent stretch of losses tell me what is going on? They were on fire right before the Trade Deadline... What happened?



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 04/27/2010

MGoPoints: 10620

migblue

March 22nd, 2015 at 2:24 PM ^

Maybe other teams have figured out Nyquist and Tatar. I was also expecting a lot more from Jurco this year. If they lose in the 1st round again, Holland needs to trade some of the young players for a proven commodity. By the time they put it together, it will be time for Pavel and Z to retire.

Joined: 03/20/2015

MGoPoints: 88