GMRwings1983

Well, that wasn't the format back then. OT should be 5 on 5 if you're going to give the loser zero points. That was the old system. It'd be unfair to punish a team for losing a 4 on 4.

Well not really, since Kopecky isn't a great player and no one would rank him above those two. But when you're comparing great players to each other, you can't just go on Cup rings. Too many things factor into that. In this case, Orr didn't play a full career. Also, remember that back then there was Montreal to mess around with. Winning a Cup with any other franchise couldn't have been easy. At the same time, if Orr did play a full career, he'd have a lot more than 8 Norris trophies. Lidstrom won a few Norris trophies which could have arguably gone to other players. Orr was putting up numbers no defenseman could have dreamed of back then. He was clearly the favorite to take the Norris every year.

Me too. I've had to deal with Blues fans before, and they act like their team has won something before. It's pretty funny actually. f*** their organization and the players. I hope they lose in the first round.

Please tell me, you're not serious with a crappy explanation like that. Let me try the same reasoning. Gretzky < Beliveau 4 Stanley cups < 10 Stanley Cups

I think that would be even worse. A team shouldn't be punished with zero points for losing a shootout. It's one thing to decide Olympic elimination games that way, but not regular season games. It would be too harsh. And there's nothing wrong with ties. It just means neither team was good enough to win the game in regulation or in OT. Hence, neither gets two points. Basically, each game should have a maximum of two points on the line.

Anaheim in 97, Phoenix in 98 and Vancouver in 2002. Also, Colorado in 1997, 2002 and 2008. Colorado isn't on the west coast, but it's still a big travel for the Wings. Honestly, travel isn't an issue. If a team is driven enough to win the Cup like those teams were, they'll overcome it. As for matchup preferences, with San Jose and Chicago dropping lower in the group, finishing higher might not be a good thing. I'd rather play Nashville or Phoenix over those teams.

Detroit would be lower in the standings. I've said this a million times, but I'd go back to the system before 1999-2000. Go back to having ties and the OT loser getting no point. And overtime would be 5 on 5.

Many of our wins are shootout wins, though.

Don't know if anyone has mentioned this, but Wilson would have been better for that HBO show than Carlyle.

DraperFan is that you?

Bertuzzi got injured. Here we go again.

I'm working on it.

Hanta yo baby!

Promising start to the season, but not much since then.

I picked Pittsburgh and Vancouver to play in the Finals. At this point, Pittsburgh is unlikely to get there, because it looks more and more that Crosby won't be back, let alone back permanently. Vancover will likely come out of the West, but I still voted San Hosay as our biggest threat. We actually match up better with Vancouver if we had to play them in the Conference Finals.

Posts like these are why so many people here don't like you.

Be really happy.

I always hated when Detroit played against Sakic. Same with Forsberg, although he can be hated for other reasons.

Couldn't have happened to a bigger ******.

I haven't seen the hunger from this team the last several playoffs. The hunger was there in 2007 and 2008. I said before the season that we won't win the Cup with this roster, and I'm sticking with that since Holland didn't do anything at the deadline.

Well, the Wings traveled out west in 1997, 1998 and 2002, yet that didn't stop them from winning the Cup. If a team is motivated and deserving to win the Cup, they will, regardless of travel. We swept Phoenix last year, but still lost the first 3 to San Jose, despite being the more rested team.

I wonder how many other players back then were hiding medical problems. Some guys may have played their entire careers with a concussion.

I meant a horrible road playoff record. Yeah, I guess we didn't win the President's trophy in 2009, but we still had home ice over the Pens. Didn't seem to matter at the end of the day. Yeah, I was looking more at playoff road records. You have to win big playoff games on the road to win the Cup. All the Cup winning years I saw, the Wings had to win big playoff games on the road and did. That was my point about home ice advantage not being that important.

The loser of this divisional race gets stuck playing Chicago in the first round. We can beat Chicago, but it would be an unneeded expense. Just ask Vancouver how fun that was last year.

Crosby paid him to steal it.