Ducks vs Red Wings Game 7

[Apocalypse]

All these Game 7's, we're really getting a treat this year..
I've got my Wings of course. =D

@

Ducks-Red Wings Preview

ROMULUS, Mich. (AP) - The previous two Stanley Cup champions are meeting in the playoffs for the third time since the NHL expanded four decades ago.

Perhaps fittingly, a Game 7 is necessary.
The Detroit Red Wings and Anaheim Ducks have pushed their Western Conference semifinal series to the limit just as Edmonton and Calgary did in 1991 and Montreal and Boston did in 1971 in the last two matchups of Cup winners.

"It should be exciting," Red Wings coach Mike Babcock said Wednesday when the team plane landed in rain on a miserable evening that matched its mood following a 2-1 loss. "Game 7s are always a lot of fun.

"It's a good opportunity for us. We played all year to have home-ice advantage."

The second-seeded Red Wings will face the eighth-seeded Ducks on Thursday night at home, hoping to follow a trend.

Entering Wednesday's night's Pittsburgh-Washington finale, home teams have won 63 percent of Game 7s since 1939.

Two of the exceptions, though, happened when the Oilers defeated the Flames in overtime and the Canadiens beat the Bruins by two goals as road teams in matchups of previous champions.

This postseason, the Ducks have proven they can win anywhere and their confidence has grown.

"Everyone is believing we can beat this team," Anaheim star Ryan Getzlaf said.

Anaheim won Game 2 at Joe Louis Arena in triple overtime and opened the playoffs with two road wins against the top-seeded San Jose Sharks.

"Nobody expected us to beat San Jose," Ducks forward Todd Marchant said. "We're trying to ride the unexpected.

"Hopefully, we can pull another one off."

Ducks coach Randy Carlyle hopes his team turns the tide in shots on goal, but said that statistic isn't foolproof.

"They've gotten more shots than we have. So did San Jose," Carlyle said. "But where is San Jose?"

The Ducks avoided elimination with a 2-1 win Tuesday night, then Scott Niedermayer roughed up Detroit's Pavel Datsyuk, and Corey Perry pounded Detroit's Brian Rafalski.

"I felt that some guys took liberties on certain players unknown to fight," Red Wings forward Daniel Cleary said. "So, we just have to see Thursday."

With so much at stake, Red Wings star Henrik Zetterberg doesn't expect gloves to drop again.

"I think the feelings and emotions will carry over to Game 7, but I don't think the fighting will carry over," Zetterberg said on the eve of his first Game 7.

The winner will advance to play the Chicago Blackhawks in the Western Conference finals.

The loser will go home.

"I said a few words last night, and Babs said a few words," Detroit's soft-spoken captain Nicklas Lidstrom said. "We know what's on the line for us, and for them."

As experienced as Lidstrom is, with a franchise-record 224 games of postseason experience, he hasn't played in a Game 7 since Detroit beat Colorado 7-0 in the 2002 conference finale and he's been in just five in his career.

"Everything is on the line," Lidstrom said. "We have play with a sense of desperation from the start, and we have to do that for 60 minutes."

Early or late, Detroit simply needs Datsyuk to score.

The NHL MVP finalist is goalless in his last eight games and has just two assists against Anaheim.

Datsyuk was inches away from an overtime-forcing goal in the final seconds of Game 6.

"It's not like he's been void of chances," Carlyle said. "Even if stat-wise he hasn't had a huge impression, he still has quality chances on creates a lot."

Babcock is hoping for Datsyuk and the team, his scoring drought ends against Anaheim goaltender Jonas Hiller, whose first NHL postseason has been nothing short of sensational.

"Any time you're scorer and you haven't score, no matter what anybody says, you always are squeezing a little bit," Babcock said. "The big thing for him, he's a real good, dominant player is to just play. Don't think too much.

"It would be a good time for him to break out."

 

[Apocalypse]

Got the ducks, just cause I've liked them forever. I didn't really expect them to get past the first round, but here they are. HOnestly though, I think Detroit is just too strong.

Yeah, it's home ice, and they took Game 6 off imo, any person who watched the game could tell the Wings weren't playing to their full potential on purpose, but yeah...

I think it's gonna be a close game, say 4-3 or 5-4 but Wings prevail.


Btw Poll's up.

 

[Ravin]

I picked the Ducks. I just have this feeling they may come out and shock everyone again, that this ride they are on isn't over just yet. I expect this game to be the game 7 we were expecting from the Penguins/Capitals series.

 

[zack54attack]

As a 'Hawks fan.. I dont know who I want them to play. They know Detroit very well, but its DETROIT in the playoffs and thats scary. as for the Ducks, they have more veteran leadership than the 'Hawks, but the 'Hawks would have home ice... Hmmm

 

[Apocalypse]

3-2, from what i can tell is Anaheim when in our zone, is really aggravating our defenseman, and the two goals Anaheim scored is luck.

That Pronger scrap earlier in the game should've been called, among other things, Anaheim's playing a real annoying game and it's distracting the Wings every once in a while..

 

[Ravin]

Well one step closer to a rematch of last season.

 

[Ralnakor]

Reffing was bad both ways. Of course there are a few I was up in arms over non-calls.....Pronger molesting Hossa being the most obvious, but the reffing these last two games has been atrocious both ways.

That said, a very eventful game to watch.

 

[Apocalypse]

Haha, very exciting and good game to watch, Anaheim was up to their gritty style of play, and Detroit had a little problem with it, but like the reporters and players have already said, it was Detroit's depth that won the game for them..

Hawks and Detroit is gonna be a really really good series.

 

[wr50l]

Well, glad to see the Wings could pull it out while getting fucked in the ass by the refs.

Also glad to see the Wings score on a game winning goaltender interference you selectively blind fool? Fucking fannies that win a game and still complain about something ... wtf?!

 

[nesper]

Also glad to see the Wings score on a game winning goaltender interference you selectively blind fool? Fucking fannies that win a game and still complain about something ... wtf?!

that would not have mattered as the puck was not in his control and he wouldnt have stopped it the cbc replays showed the puck bouncing towards the net no where near his control.

 

[Apocalypse]

that would not have mattered as the puck was not in his control and he wouldnt have stopped it the cbc replays showed the puck bouncing towards the net no where near his control.

truth. There's 0% chance that would've been called no goal.

 

[wr50l]

that would not have mattered as the puck was not in his control and he wouldnt have stopped it the cbc replays showed the puck bouncing towards the net no where near his control.

Now I'm not a rule geek so I don't know the legality of the play 100%. However any notion that the puck would've rolled in on its own momentum is whack, Hiller puts his pad down and while not covering the puck he stops its momentum. It would not have gone far enough to cross the line. It's also clear through watching the net cam replay a few times that Hiller kicks it in because his leg is pushed back by Cleary's stick. And that contact was not incidental.

Now this is where my knowledge of the rule is incomplete. It's pretty clear that Hiller doesn't have control of the puck. However it is also pretty clear that Hiller kicks it in because his leg is pushed back by Cleary. Now if Hiller has frozen the puck under his leg then that's a certain no goal call, but as he doesn't have it frozen, does the rule change?

 

[Apocalypse]

Now I'm not a rule geek so I don't know the legality of the play 100%. However any notion that the puck would've rolled in on its own momentum is whack, Hiller puts his pad down and while not covering the puck he stops its momentum. It would not have gone far enough to cross the line. It's also clear through watching the net cam replay a few times that Hiller kicks it in because his leg is pushed back by Cleary's stick. And that contact was not incidental.

Now this is where my knowledge of the rule is incomplete. It's pretty clear that Hiller doesn't have control of the puck. However it is also pretty clear that Hiller kicks it in because his leg is pushed back by Cleary. Now if Hiller has frozen the puck under his leg then that's a certain no goal call, but as he doesn't have it frozen, does the rule change?

Yeah, since he didn't have it frozen, like for sure, and the little motion of his leg caused the puck to go in the net, that made it a goal.

it it would've been frozen, completely under his pad, and he moved and the puck went in, that wouldn't have been a goal because he had control.

 

[Buzzman]

Cleary didnt push his leg, the camera from inside the net showed his stick completely under his pad.