Abel to Yzerman
by IwoCPO on 04/10/07 at 12:10 AM ET
Long, long, long frigging week. In case you’d forgotten, here are a few items to worry about: Zetterberg’s health, Bertuzzi’s health, Mike Babcock’s ability to adapt and the true terror of another early loss. A few items for you to consider as Stress-Ex 2007 grows nearer.
First: the deep diggers are busy, but not exactly unified. Everyone was at the media avail today, but they all seem to come away with different interpretations
Mike Babcock said Henrik Zetterberg will play in Game 1 against Calgary Thursday. Zetterberg, who’s been skating for more than two weeks, also believes he’s ready to go, though he didn’t seem as confident as Babcock. “If I can’t play Thursday, then we’ll shoot for Sunday (Game 2),’’ Zetterberg said.
Babcock said he believes Bertuzzi will play in the opener.
The Red Wings will likely have Henrik Zetterberg in the lineup for Thursday’s playoff opener against the Calgary Flames. Todd Bertuzzi, out with a concussion, did not practice today and may not play in Game 1.
“I don’t have any idea,” said Wings coach Mike Babcock when questioned about Bertuzzi’s condition. “I could pretend that I could explain it to you. He’s not ready. They’ll tell me when he is. I don’t know.”
Although he didn’t practice Monday, Todd Bertuzzi (concussion) will play in Game 1 of the opening round against Calgary, Thursday, according to Detroit coach Mike Babcock.
To recap: “Believes”, “May not”, and “will”.
I’m sorry, did Babcock hold different pressers for each Digger? How can such disparate opinions come from the same discussion?
Moving on. I’ve added The Real Deal to the Calgary section on the port side. They’re the first Flame blog I’ve seen with a series analysis.
Detroit has argued their problems over their last few playoff runs have been primarily due to goaltending, but I’m not buying it. The team has had deeper issues (Chelios, Datsyuk, anyone?) and goaltending has been secondary. Sure, their goalies haven’t stolen any wins, but the team as a whole hasn’t been good enough. Now that Detroit has Hasek, they’re out of excuses - unless of course Hasek gets hurt. In other words, they’ve got an excuse lined up already.
Close. In my opinion, if Detroit loses a healthy Hasek could very well be to blame. I seem to be in the minority who believe Hasek could actually turn out to be a weakness in the first round.
Speaking of Hasek, Mike Chen’s blog over at Fox lists him as the player who has the most to prove, and the most pressure.
1: Dominik Hasek, Detroit Red Wings. As the Dominator goes, so do the Red Wings. Hasek’s groin stood the test of the regular season, but it is still an unknown factor that could snap — literally — at any time. If Hasek stays healthy, the Red Wings can go deep. If his groin bothers him, it’s a crapshoot.
The Globe and Mail’s Erik Duhatschek says the Flames have a simple game plan to neutralize Pavel Datsyuk.
“A team like Detroit, they’re such a puck-possession and transition team that the most effective way to beat them is to play a hard-nosed game and be very physical against them,” Regehr said.
Regehr’s primary assignment, according to Duhatschek, will be to shadow Datsyuk. Really? We can live with that, I think.
Finally, I think it was Aaron in a post earlier today who pointed out that Bruce MacLeod is so far above the other DD’s that lumping him in with them would be an insult. I think he’s right. By Thursday he could very well have earned the glossary entry as the “Anti-Digger.” We’ll see.
Be the first to comment.
Add a Comment
Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.
Most Recent Blog Posts
About Abel to Yzerman
Welcome to Abel to Yzerman, a Red Wing blog since 1977. No other site on the internet has better-researched, fact-laden and better prepared discussions than A2Y. Re-phrase: we do little research, find facts and stats highly overrated and claim little to no preparation. There are 19 readers of A2Y. No more, no less. All of them, except maybe one, are juvenile in nature. Reminding them of that in the comment section will only encourage them to prove that. Your suggestions and critiques are welcome: firstname.lastname@example.org