| Penguins never stood a chance |
|
|
|
They say that any team can win any game on any given night. The reason they say this is to give hope for all of those inferior teams who are set to play an impossible matchup. Unfortunately for those inferior teams, the likelihood is that the dominant team will win on most given nights, with the inferior team winning on rare fluke occasions. That is the best way I can sum up this series. AccuScore simulations had the Penguins winning this series 45 percent of the time before game one, but it wasn’t even close. The Penguins were dominated in the first two games. They managed a win in game three, but were dominated again in game four. A fluke victory in game five pushed the series to six games, where once again they were dominated. There really is nothing you can say about this series except that Detroit is by far the best team in the NHL, and they showed it by dismantling the Penguins in six games. You can call it a fluke, citing the cup winning goal that Marc-Andre Fleury knocked in to the net. You can say that the Penguins were close to putting in the tying goal in the final seconds once again in game six. You can even blame the refs for poor officiating. Any of these excuses for the Penguins are weak compared to the impressive list of reasons why the Penguins had no shot. Here are five keys as to why Detroit was by far the dominant team in this series. 1. Two-Man “Advantage” In game four the Penguins were down by one goal with a two man advantage late in the third period. The Penguins failed to register a shot during this power play, and spent most of their time either in the neutral zone, or in their own defensive zone. The Penguins had another 5-on-3 advantage in the first period of game six. They actually managed to get two shots on net, but once again failed to put the puck in the net. 2. Never Had a Shot The Penguins out-shot the Red Wings 12 to 11 in the opening period of game one. In the 20 periods that followed, the Penguins only out-shot Detroit in two periods. Pittsburgh recorded less than 10 shots in 18 of 21 periods in this series. Detroit topped the 10 shot mark in 10 periods. Detroit averaged 37 shots per game, while Pittsburgh averaged 23 shots per game. AccuScore simulations showed all throughout the series that Pittsburgh decreased their chances of winning this series by 20 percent if they were held to such low shot totals. 3. Make Yourself at Home The Penguins were dominated in Detroit’s two home games to start the playoffs down 2-0. Pittsburgh managed a not-so-dominating performance in game three to get their first win, but lost in game four and six at home to eventually lose this series. With both teams coming in to this series hot at home, and both teams winning the majority of AccuScore simulations in their home games, the big factor in this series was Detroit dominating Pittsburgh on their own ice. Even on the road Detroit managed to out-shoot Pittsburgh by an average of 31 to 23. 4. Take Your Best Shot The best way to sum up how dominant Detroit’s offense was is to point out the final goal. Henrik Zetterberg intercepted a pass in the neutral zone, surrounded by four Penguins. He skated the puck in to the offensive zone, still surrounded by Penguins, and fired a shot in that managed to eventually make it in to the net, thanks to a deflection off of Marc-Andre Fleury. A lot will be made on the goal bouncing off of Fleury in to the net, but the key to that play was that Zetterberg was surrounded by Penguins the whole time, and managed to put a great shot on net. Not only did the Penguins get heavily out-shot in this series, but they also struggled at putting quality shots on net, something Detroit had no issues with. This is due to the fact that Detroit’s defense stepped up to attack the Penguins offense, while the Penguins defense backed off when Detroit entered the zone, even if it was an odd man advantage in Pittsburgh’s favor. 5. Give It Away Now The Penguins had obvious problems moving the puck around, with intercepted passes, and passing bouncing off of sticks, either breaking up plays, or slowing a play down. This led to an increase in giveaways. Pittsburgh saw an average of four more giveaways per game than Detroit in this series. The Penguins gave the puck away ten or more times in every game in this series except game two. Gave five was the only time Detroit allowed over ten giveaways. The Penguins may have been the best team in the Eastern Conference, but there was no questioning that the Red Wings were the best team in the NHL. Despite the six games, this series wasn’t even close. Detroit dominated games one, two, four, and six, while Pittsburgh played the “any given team can win” card with games three and especially with game five. You could look at certain situations and say that this was a close series. The game five victory made possible by a late goal in the third period, the last second chance by the Penguins in game six, and the game winning goal allowed by Fleury in game six all gave the impression that the Penguins were in this series. The fact is that the Penguins were dominated, and the only fluke about this series was that it lasted six games. Trackback(0)
Comments (2)
twilliams
said:
|
|||||
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed |
So let's review why this was a close series: -"If the Pens score on their 5-on-3 opportunities in game 4 and 6, perhaps they win those games in overtime and then it's a completely different series and everyone would be saying, "What a great series by the Pens." -"I read that the Pens hit the post four more times than the Wings did in the series. If those four shots go in, the series completely changes." -Games 1 and 2 were closer than the final scores indicate, especially game 2. The Wings won game 4 2-1 and game 6 3-2. Well, I agree with you. IF the Penguins would have scored rather than hitting the post those four times, and IF the Penguins would have gotten more than two shots total on their two five-on-three penalties, and IF the Penguins would have scored just one more goal to force overtime in game 4 and 6, and IF the Penguins would have happened to score in overtime in both of those games after forcing overtime, and IF the Penguins would have just scored a goal in the first two games...then it would have been a close series. IF doesn't make a series close. Facts make a series close. Here are the facts: -The Penguins didn't score a goal until game three. -They almost were eliminated in five games, but escaped with a 6-on-5 goal with 35 seconds left in game five. -The Penguins won game five because, after failing to score on two power play opportunities in OT, they scored on a double minor penalty. -Detroit dominated the shot chart because they had the puck more often, and never let the Penguins in to their defensive zone. -The only time this series really looked even was the first period of game one, and the two instances when the Penguins had a 5-on-3 power play. All you really have to say about this series is that the Penguins had two 5-on-3 power plays, failed to score on both, and the puck was in the neutral zone or the Penguins zone more often than it was in the Detroit zone. This is when Detroit had only three men on the ice, and the Penguins still couldn't control the puck in their offensive zone. Yes, the TV analysts are going to say it's a close series. That's a better selling point for their product than: "One team has no chance, the other team is a lock to win, stay tuned Detroit fans! The Red Wings win the cup, NEXT!" |
NHLfan
said:
 |
Tim Williams: I happened to stumble upon your blog and couldn't disagree more. In fact, it's a bunch of BS. You call yourself on hockey analyst. Who the hell are you? National analysts who watched the finals, including Eddie Olczyk, said it was a close series. Yes, the Wings were the better team, but they didn't dominate the series. Games 1 and 2 were closer than the final scores indicate, especially game 2. The Wings won game 4 2-1 and game 6 3-2. That's dominating? I will grant you that the Wings got the better of the overall play, but they didn't dominate on the scoreboard, and that's all that matters. If the Pens score on their 5-on-3 opportunities in game 4 and 6, perhaps they win those games in overtime and then it's a completely different series and everyone would be saying, "What a great series by the Pens." The fact that the Wings averaged more shots that the Pens is way overblown. The Wings were among the NHL leaders in average shots per game and the Pens were in the bottom half. Opponents consistently outshot the Pens throughout the season and still had a great record. The Pens don't need many shots to score. I read that the Pens hit the post four more times than the Wings did in the series. If those four shots go in, the series completely changes. That's how close it was. But credit the Wings. They deserved to win. |
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|