RockyMountainWingGal

I've never seen a team get bailed out by more PPs when they are in trouble at the end of games or in OT than the Sharks this year. And they couldn't even score on the lowly Avs with 3 wrapped gifts by the Refs there. Avs should have won that game in regulation. Let the Sharks have the Pres trophy - it's sometimes a curse more than an asset in the POs. Everyone will talk about how they are the team to beat - see how they like the pressure - they haven't handled pressure less than that the last several seasons....

Osgood wasn't very good vs. the Avalanche in 2000 or the Kings in 2001. Can't say he lost those series for the Wings - but he didn't help. Hasek provided a much needed revival in goal at that particular time. Name a playoff series the Wings have won because of Osgood. I can't think of one. That's because he's a mediocre goalie - he will not win you a series, maybe not even steal you a game, but he is also unlikely to lose the series on his own too Just because some of us don't have alot of confidence in Osgood doesn't mean we are "lacking the facts" - everyone is entitled to their own opinion. How could anyone have confidence after his regular season performance? - even Oz was disappointed in himself. Just because Oz makes me nervous does not mean I won't root for him to reincarnate himself come playoff time - hell if I could suck it up and support Legace in the POs and he was brutal - this will be a piece of cake....

Problem is last year we had two good GTs going into the POs, one faltered a bit, and the other stepped in and took over. This year we have two bad GTs going into the POs, so switching won't really help/change things.

It is unlikely. However, there is certainly a woman out there somewhere who is built for contact sports and who could handle - and dish out - the rough play. I watched the women's weight lifting in the Olympics - oh my - those gals probably couldn't ice skate for *&^% but I don't think your average NHL player would scare them.

Yes the Wings have other problems BUT we lead the league in scoring goals, and are third in shots against per game. You claim it is the teams' responsibility to cover up for our poor GT - I say on the whole the team is doing just that by scoring alot of goals and keeping shots down, but it is the GT's job to stop the puck. I think the team will play fine come PO time, but I'm not sure they can play well enough to overcome our obvious weakness in goal. I said before, I hope I'm wrong and they do, but it worries me.

His last 3 games Osgood had 7.09 (yanked), 2, and 4 GAA - for an average of 4.36. My point is our GAA sucks. So officially Osgood's GAA is listed as 3.18 for the season - 40th in the league, above only Legace, MacDonald, Raycroft, Toskala, & Hedberg. And he was just outplayed by MacDonald last weekend. He gives up ALOT of goals - I can make a list but several games come to mind (8-2 Jackets, 6-5 Avs, 6-5 SJ to name a few). But there is no use debating statistics - there is no way to spin this into a decent GT season. It is no secret to anyone our GT sucks. The Q is what can be done at the 11th hour about it? Maybe not much. 20-20 hindsight but maybe not trading for a GT is going to come back and bite the Wings in the a$$. Hope not, but if anyone is confident about our GT going into the POs, I'd like a pair of their glasses.

Not sure where the Holland leaving stuff is coming from either.... Problem is we CANNOT go out and get a star goalie with the cap system - not w/o giving up something precious in return. Plus before the lockout, Holland did sign/trade for big name goalies - Hasek, Cujo - and we STILL didn't have a clearcut #1 save for '02 with Hasek. So it is not just about the cap, although that doesn't help. It's like a curse on the Red Wings that we will never have a long term clear cut #1 starting goalie. We have won 4 Cups though in this interim so obviously the Wings are getting away with it - I personally think we would have had more with better GT a few of those years, but cannot complain about the number of rings for sure.... Next season it starts all over again - our starter will surely be someone who has not played the position for us before.....

Good post. I'm not a huge Conklin fan either - but it is all we've got right now. The writing is on the wall for Osgood - has been for months - but I too believed he would pull it together. Didn't happen. I hate that the Wings rarely have the #1 guy who makes it through the season and the POs, but for some reason for being such a great organization we just don't have a franchise goalie - or even a guy who is the starter for several seasons in a row. It drives me nuts. And here we are again a few weeks from the POs with NO clearcut starting goalie. I suppose all teams must have an Achilles heel and this is ours.

I totally agree. I am tire of blaming the defense for all the soft goals let in. Sure our D hasn't played as well this year. But most other teams have a poorer defensive core than ours - and their goalie doesn't give up 4-5 goals per game on shots in the low-mid 20s. No team can win with GT like that. And on topic, as long as we are coasting into the 2 seed, Lidstrom needs a few games off, maybe Datsyuk too.....

That's what happens when their normally soft Pacific heavy schedule has them playing back to back games in the Central. 1pt/4 should have been 0/4 but the Hawks screwed it up. If our GT could only hold up, I'd take the Wings straight up over the Sharks any time....

I don't pay any attention to the East - I thought NJ and Boston were in the same division until a few days ago! All those places are so congested close together I get confused who is where....like why are both NY teams in the same division? Anyhow Boston clinched because their division sucks....kind of like San Jose. Heck the West Central might be the best division in the league (possible 4 PO teams) - who would have thought a few years ago? lol

Their division sucks &*%$#. Not a single playoff team - no competition. Nashville had that game in the bag the other night but couldn't pull through. How many of the Sharks "W"s have come in OT?? Anyhow, beating up on crappy division teams won't help them come PO time. Us Wings fans ought to know, having had a weak division for several years prior to this season. And tomorrow they get the lowly reeling Avs, must be nice....

Neuroscience is far less advanced than many other areas - not because they haven't tried just as hard, but because the brain and neurosystem are so complex. Let's fact it, a stomach, kidney etc is much easier to figure out. Case in point, Liam Neeson's wife died from a minor spill on a bunny slope = doctors and scientists have no remedy for these things....

If that is the case then the Sharks REALLY are in trouble.

I don't remember the Division ever being contested this year - or anyone ever suggesting it was. The Hawks are just excited to be going to the POs for the first time in ?8 years..... I'm dreaming of a Red Wings vs. Quenneville matchup again.

I disagree - going down 0-3 to the lowly Yotes is what lost SJ the game. Kind of stuff happens to the Wings enough too - we play poorly early - get behind - wind up coming back to tie the game - but then lose in reg or OT (the Avalanche game at the Joe comes to mind). Alot of fans want to blame officiating etc - but usually if teams lose there's a good reason for it.

Funny the Red Wings have always been criticized for playing in a poor division and having an easier road to #1 in the conference. I think the Sharks deserve some criticism now. Their division stinks - they are the only PO bound team in the Pacific. What a pathetic bunch of offensive no-shows. LA cannot get a shot off on a 2 on 0 last night, couldn't buy a goal in the shoot-out; the Ducks were equally bad tonight. The Central has 3 teams in and the other 2 competing at #9 and 10. Who would have thought? Anyhow, with SJs soft schedule the rest of the way - division heavy - doubt we can catch them. But no matter, as long as we are playing better than them in April/May won't matter....

The East already has 4 original six teams - the West only has 2, one that has been a poor franchise for years until recently. Bettman will die before he lets the Wings move East. Three teams is too many for the NYC area - let them keep the Rangers and Devils - and move the Isles somewhere else. I personally like the MLB/NFL models where teams are divided equally into two conferences not by geographics. Ie. Yankees in the AL, Mets in the NL. That way all teams have somewhat equal travel. If some teams don't like it - tough sh&* - the West teams do it every year - let the East teams have to do it too...... p.s. Do the Wings get reimbursed for mileage traveled over the average for the NHL? I doubt it. They should. Many of those East teams don't have to pay as much for travel and that's an unfair burden on the West owners - they didn't make the decision to be in the Western conference...

Nope - the Sharks only have 5/17 games remaining vs. PO teams (as of today's standings). Don't see it happening because our division-heavy schedule has many more teams fighting for POs/PO positioning. No matter, don't mind being the 2 seed UNLESS we have a game 7 of the SCF in the Tank - then I'll be rethinking this....

I agree. If the cap is 56.7 mill now, then teams need to work with that to win this year and next year, and not try to be 10 mill under because it *might* drop in 2 years. Why not amend the CBA? Neither teams nor players want it to go down - neither do fans. That doesn't mean that teams should not have to bear the brunt of signing long term overpaying contracts - cough cough like Brian Campbell or so. Would teams that want to dump salary be able to just end an undesirable contract because of the lower cap? I doubt it. I think if the cap drops, than players salaries should drop an equal proportion. Realistically I know that will not fly but it seems the only fair way to do it if the salary cap drops. Or they would have to allow re-negotiating of contracts mid-term. Total mess all the way around.

The way we are playing, we do not deserve the #1 seed. And to be frank, I don't really want it. Let the Sharks have the 1 seed target on their backs. The only scenario in which it will matter is a game 7 of the WCF if both teams make it there. It will all come down to matchups - the 5-8 seeds likely will not be decided until the last week of the season. We had good draws last year, bad the year before (3 west coast/canada series). I'm more concerned about having a goalie who can stop a puck than the seeding right now...

It's poor league management. If the salary cap is dropped, than each existing contract should be dropped a proportionate amount, so teams that have been careful to stay under are not suddenly confronted with "oops sorry we lowered it, your going to have to cut one of the guys you worked so hard to sign". Plus the fact that it is completely ridiculous to drop an already low cap number. signing UFAs = fair game making offers for RFAs = fair game good drafting and good development = fair game trades= fair game Taking signed players away from another team is unfair imo. That team should trade for that player if they want him so bad. And yes waiting around to see if the cap drops is poor management imo. What if it doesn't drop and that is all a team was counting on? Most traditional markets can handle the cap as it is or higher anyways. So what you really have is Bettman trying to keep franchises in non-traditional hockey markets at the expense of the other teams, imo.

Agree. Parity=we cannot have an expensive defensive core, expensive forward core, AND afford a shut-down goalie. Thus we are a solid team on both ends - sans the defense forgetting to show up about every third game - but do not have great goaltending. I have also noticed this season alot of lopsided games. It seems like there have been more than normal, but can't say I've looked into it. All the good teams have gotten smoked a few times. I will say that SJ - even though they are on a losing streak - always plays a tight game. Most of their losses are by one goal, or in OT. On alot of nights, looking at the Wings play, it doesn't seem like we should be at/near the top of the conference. But we are because there are no teams that are flawless, or near flawless in the parity league. Will be interesting to see how things unfold, although our GT does not give me alot of confidence heading towards the fun season....

That is the day I will stop watching the NHL. I wasn't for the cap - but it wasn't a horrible idea - 3/4 leagues have them now. However, it somewhat favors poor, struggling franchises and allows them to remain in the league at the expense of successful ones. If teams that have worked hard to sign and retain their top players - often their own draft picks - get punished for that and have to send these guys to teams that have poor management, and have made bad picks, that would be a serious injustice. I wouldn't want to watch that kind of a league.....

Yes - it is impossible and improbable to do away with all back to backs since many teams with arena sharing etc. But it wouldn't be so hard to limit them - or have a small range that each team may get - so you don't have the 15 vs. 8 b2bs. A bad example was last fall when we played LA, night off, Ana one night, then flew to SJ for the b2b. Usually it is Ana and LA b2b. We also almost ALWAYS get the Avs in their barn on the second of b2b nights. It's a conspiracy to help them beat us! Minor gripe - you get what you get with the schedule. How about making the East teams travel equal miles? That would mean dividing the league evenly with Eastern and Western teams in two new conferences - sort of like the NFL and MLB. It'll never happen - but would love to see how those East pansies would like that.....