Doc Holliday

There is a red mark for the amount of times I've palmed myself in the face.

You are just grasping at straws. The puck cannot be kicked in. Whether it hits the post, an abandonded stick stick, or the goaltender before going in is irrelevant. These are the only exceptions for a kicked puck:

The puck wasn't kicked into the goal because it never crossed the line. If Hossa was awarded that goal he would have kicked it into the net and would have been the last player to have had hit the puck. There is no precedent for allowing kicked in goals that hit the post or abandoned sticks. If there was an exception they would have stated such.

We are Wings fans. The entire point is to be happy when things go our way. Second, these are the Hawks we are talking about. We hate the Hawks and are going to be pissed about it. Third, the puck DEFLECTED off Bertuzzi's skate after his foot made the kicking motion. It was not due to the momentum of his foot that the puck went into the net. Then stop getting involved in the thread and focus on other things? People are pissed about the call. They are going to say so on a Wings discussion board. Just because you think it is understandable doesn't mean it is crazy for others to think it wasn't. FIBS: For all the talking out of your ass you seem to have an issue with finding evidence of anything you say.

Perhaps not, but he is still a douchebag for taking the run anyway. He took a charge and picked him out way before Williams passed the net. It also doesn't help that I cannot stand the guy in general.

I can see that. This one may not have been terribly dirty but he owes the NHL for his previous cheap shots on Williams and Helm.

Did I say I have no hope? I'm making an assessment of what I think the Wings have issues with and how that will make things difficult for them in the playoffs. I hope they win the cup and will be cheering for them every step of the way. But I do have worries and have explicitly stated them. They are perfectly reasonable criticisms and you ignored them and chose instead to make ridiculous quips to make personal attacks. What did I say about you not talking hockey often? 2. I believe if the team doesn't show up for consistent stretches (such as cup winners of the past) I think that poses an issue 3. You have a point on goaltenders being able to turn it around (I also believe Crawford is going to play poorly in the playoffs with Chicago) It is all about whether you agree or disagree (and I can easily accept people having belief that the team will turn it around)I don't see it based on what I have seen from the team, but I can understand if posters here believe the team has what it takes to do very well.

First off, I don' think that they are "dead and buried". I just do not have the utmost faith and belief that they will make a deep run (second round is where I think they would be headed this season) for a number of reasons. 1. The West has serious parity. Most of the lower seeded teams have a serious chance to upset any of the top 3 or 4. 2. The Red Wings have not been consistent this season. After going on a 20 game tear that had them at the class of the league, the opponents got harder, the schedule was more brutal, and the Wings began to play mediocre. 3. We have a question mark in net, who was hot and cold last playoffs and isn't playing any better than he did last season. He could turn it around, but there is no reason to think he has a switch in his second NHL season. 4. The defense hasn't looked good at all. Lidstrom is slower (yet still reliable), Stuart doesn't communicate well with Lidstrom, Rafalski is once again being terrible defensively, and the bottom players are on the whole not playing very well when it comes to stifling the opponent's opportunities 5. The offense has had some great spurts but since January has had issues at some point with every part of the roster. However this is one of the few parts of the team this season that I think can turn the switch based on last year. Now is there anything that they have shown this season that leads you to believe I have no idea what I'm talking about other than what teams have done in the playoffs in the past (which could make you confident or pessimistic depending on which series you focus on)?

Montreal had a great goaltender in Halak and shutdown defenders who stifled the opposition. They were tired after the first two rounds and weren't much trouble for the Flyers. Philadelphia was riddled with injuries and had a terrible coach to start off in Stevens. Laviolette really helped turn that team around, and by the time they got to the end of the season they had improved to a much better team (it helped they played against a weak Devils team, a Bruins team that choked a 3-0 series (and game 7) lead away, and a Montreal team that had to contend with the offense of the Capitals and Penguins. Hell, those examples don't really prove anything definite or likely simply because on the other hand you can pick many teams of the past who have had great records but were upset in the first two rounds. Does that give you a fair indication that the Wings will be upset? Absolutely not. Even when Detroit was slumping in 2009 they had an obviously dominant offense and Osgood was able to show he could improve towards the end of the season over Conklin. The 2008 Wings were a force 80% of the season. The 2002 Wings were also a force. There was a serious indication they would do very very well against their opposition based on what they did overall in the course of a season. Also if you want an honest discussion don't insult me. The regular season isn't the be all end all of what you can do in the playoffs. But I don't really get confident that the Wings will go deep just because there are upsets in hockey. Detroit is going to be a top 3 seed, and will go up against teams that are looking for an upset. I get confident when I see a Red Wings team that over the course of the season shows they have what it takes against top quality competition. I have not seen that very much this season, and their play the last half of the season shows that. Do I think they will be swept in the first? No way. but I don't entirely consider them a favorite out of the West with the teams that are in it right now. Hell of a playoff class this season.

I'm aware that you are attempting to mock me. However I get into it with you consistently based on YOUR posts which do just about what he said to mock other "Negative Nancy" posters. I honestly am curious why you have the idea that they will have a deep run based on this season.

Seems par for the course, actually.

Well please, take a look back in the "Detroit needs to get tougher" or other threads of the sort downright bashing the team and organization. Or just rewrite history and continue on, which you seem to have no problem doing. I've been pessimistic LATELY because I have seen plenty to be pessimistic about. The team's offense is inconsistent and dry at times. The 4th line is Detroit's best line on most nights. Howard isn't at the level he was last season. While he has games where he does incredibly well, he responds to them with okay to mediocre ones. Detroit's defense is a joke. They hang Howard out to dry on multiple occasions and fail to make the right plays under pressure, especially in their own zone. Detroit's record against the top 8 in the West is also concerning. As is their play the latter half of the season.

Pretty sure I "gave up" once this season, but I guess you can make stuff up all you want. Nice try though. Actually I find it funny you consider me the new Mindfly considering I've been one of the more positive posters about the team. Carry on, though. Don't want to ruin your twisted perception of my opinion of the team.

Massive hyperbole for the win I suppose. Not sure what the Wings have done in the last half of the season to earn such magnificent defense and praise but I guess that's just me. Nightfall: I did before you and Crymson went on with your regular "attack of the posters" crusade. You guys are just too busy jumping up in defense of any player or part of this team that is criticized with sarcasm and exagerrated statements that you didn't notice it. Detroit cup winning teams of the past might have sleptwalk towards the end of the season. But this team hasn't shown (except in the first 20 or so games against weaker competition and an easier schedule) that they have the same talent, drive, and overall consistency to perform like they did in the post season. That is why people are so pessimistic.

I'm shocked to see people get upset at players when the team starts playing poorly. Just shocked. I'll be sure to only talk positively about things no matter what.

Let us know if it counts or not.

The entire team went to sleep after the first period. Nobody is acting like they care. At all.

Since when?

If the writers honestly use the +/- as a means to keep Lidstrom from winning it, I'll be shocked. The team in general has a low +/- overall (Datsyuk leads with a +13) and even Zetterberg has a minus season at the moment. In fact there are 10 players on Boston that have a higher +/- than Datsyuk. Also let's not forget that Lidstrom's +/- has never been consistent for more than two years. Are the writers going to imply that his even strength/defensive play wavered that much season to season?

Someone was very appreciative of your inquiry I suppose.

There is a bonus for him playing 40 games.

If Modano is scratched for one more game, he will be ineligible for a 150k contract bonus for having played a certain number of games. That is 150k off the cap for next season.

You don't have to hide from me. I won't bite.

The are the Ducks, and we hate them, so they can't possibly be a good team. You should know better.

Boring due to the fact the Wings aren't feverishly trying to come from behind?