The Red Wings Will Make The Playoffs

[Guest Howard He Do It?!]

Long article from Ansar Khan but he makes some very good points. Everything is setup perfectly for the Wings. The Wings are finally healthy and Frazen started to make an impact in the limited amount of time that he was back. The Wings will be playing teams that are ahead of them in the standings and they are playing the basement dwellers of the West. It will be a stressful 21 games, but I have no doubt that the Wings will find a way to make the playoffs.

What do you think? Will the Wings make the playoffs or will they be golfing come season's end? Put it in stone right here.

The NHL season heads into the homestretch after today’s Olympic gold medal game between the United States and Canada.

This is usually when the Detroit Red Wings are jockeying for position atop the overall standings.

This year, they have more at stake during their final 21-game segment, which begins Monday in Colorado. For the first time in 20 years, the Red Wings are fighting for a playoff berth.

They are tied for ninth place in the Western Conference, one point out of the last playoff spot. Only seven points separate the seventh-place team from the 13th.

That will increase the intensity over the last quarter of the season. Red Wings games in March and early April will be more meaningful this season.

Some streaks are sure to end.

For the first time since 1999-2000, the Red Wings, who trail the Chicago Blackhawks by 19 points, won’t win the Central Division.

Extending their nine-year run of 100-point seasons will be extremely tough. It is highly unlikely they will earn home-ice advantage in the first round of the playoffs for the 18th consecutive season.

But they are in good position to extend their most important streak by reaching the playoffs for the 19th consecutive season.

Here are just a few reasons why the Red Wings are more than likely to make the playoffs again:

Health, schedule favorable

After losing many players -- including Johan Franzen, Henrik Zetterberg, Niklas Kronwall, Valtteri Filppula, Tomas Holmstrom and Jason Williams -- for extended periods over the first 61 games, the Red Wings are as healthy as they have been all season. Only forward Kirk Maltby, who will have shoulder surgery this week, is out.

And while the schedule is compressed -- 21 games in 42 days -- it is not daunting. They play 12 home games and have only one significant road trip (three games in Western Canada March 15-20). They play the two teams directly ahead of them, Nashville and Calgary, five times combined. They have five games combined against the two worst clubs in the West, Columbus and Edmonton.

Franzen provides offense

Johan Franzen will provide a significant boost to the offense. Playing three games before the break and four games in the Olympics should help Franzen, who tore a knee ligament in the third game of the season.

He has been one of the league’s premier goal-scorers, regular season and playoffs combined, since March 2008 and will be fresh and energized.

The power play will be better and coach Mike Babcock, whose team ranks 28th in the league in five-on-five goals, will have the ability to play star centers Pavel Datsyuk and Henrik Zetterberg on separate lines for better balance.

Finally, Franzen brings a physical presence in the offensive zone that few players in the league can match.

When he is on his game, he is dominant, and can single-handedly change the direction of a game on a par with players such as Sidney Crosby and Alex Ovechkin.

Just his presence will energize the Red Wings. If he regains his scoring touch, the Red Wings could be a real force, both in the final games of the regular season, and in the playoffs.

Datsyuk, Zetterberg are due

Both are well off their typical offensive pace.

Datsyuk, who has racked up 97 points in each of the past two seasons, has 17 goals and 49 points.

Zetterberg, who has scored more than 30 goals in four consecutive seasons, has 16 goals and 48 points.

Part of the decline can be attributed to the lack of skilled players surrounding them due to injuries. But regardless, they should be more productive.

Even playing on the same line for a good portion of the season hasn’t sparked them. They haven’t strung together a dominant stretch of games like they usually do several times a season. Now is their time to step up.

Lilja will help defense

Getting defenseman Andreas Lilja back is a huge bonus. It appeared he was done for the season, perhaps forced into early retirement, due to a concussion. But he will play his first game in 12 months on Monday.

Lilja was the club’s best shot-blocker before his injury. He will provide an element of size (6-foot-3, 228 pounds) and a physical presence. He should further boost the penalty-killing, which has improved over the past few months. And he will take some of the load off Brad Stuart, who has been worn down of late.

Lilja might not long to regain his form. Having skating all season and played four games with the AHL’s Grand Rapids Griffins will help.

Lilja likely will be a regular on the third pairing. Jonathan Ericsson, seemingly a fixture in the lineup at the start of the season, has struggled and will have to compete with Brett Lebda and Derek Meech for the sixth spot on defense.

Howard steps up in net

Goalie Jimmy Howard should continue to assert his role as the team’s top goalie.

Howard ranks sixth in the NHL in goals-against average (2.28) and fifth in save percentage (.927).

Howard is not your typical rookie. He’s 25 and has four full years of experience as the starter in Grand Rapids. He has started 23 of the past 25 games and has displayed the consistency he often lacked at the AHL level.

It wouldn’t be surprising to see Howard start 17 or 18 of the remaining games, as Babcock has used him on both ends of the last two back-to-back situations. Howard clearly is their playoff starter over the veteran Chris Osgood, who has played only 7 1/2 periods since Dec. 20.

The Red Wings are in for a battle, but they control their own fate. Their goal simply is to reach the postseason. And if they make it, given their playoff experience, this is the team nobody will want to draw in the first round.

MLive

[ShanahanMan 473]

Nothing is given. The more certain you are that they're gonna make it, the more heartbroken you'll be if they don't.

[titanium2 867]

I stopped paying attention to Khan's predictions when he said the Wings would win the cup because they beat a Joel Quennville coached team.

[Guest Howard He Do It?!]

Nothing is given. The more certain you are that they're gonna make it, the more heartbroken you'll be if they don't.

Where's the fun in posting a thread like that?

I'll be disappointed regardless if the Wings don't make the playoffs. I have faith in this team though and I have seen how they can play.

[Guest Howard He Do It?!]

I stopped paying attention to Khan's predictions when he said the Wings would win the cup because they beat a Joel Quennville coached team.

And he was the only one to say that? Also, I'm pretty sure that this wasn't his only argument for why the Wings would win the Cup in 2009.

[Serapth 3]

The Red Wings are in for a battle, but they control their own fate.

So are the 8 1/2 teams in front of them in the standings as well as the Ducks just behind them. All 10 of those teams have had a break too.

The article has it right though, in many ways, the Blue Jackets and Oilers are going to play the role of Kingmakers. The Wings have about the same chances of making the playoffs as the 5 or 6 other teams on the bubble, and to pretend otherwise is to ignore the fact the emperor is wearing no clothes.

[MCleveland89 122]

Nothing is given. The more certain you are that they're gonna make it, the more heartbroken you'll be if they don't.

True. It's just hard to think otherwise. I mean, it's the Detroit Red Wings. You expect no less.

[titanium2 867]

And he was the only one to say that? Also, I'm pretty sure that this wasn't his only argument for why the Wings would win the Cup in 2009.

He was the only professional journalist I read who said that. I remember that list offering very little tangible evidence. Kind of embarrassing.

[Serapth 3]

True. It's just hard to think otherwise. I mean, it's the Detroit Red Wings. You expect no less.

Guess its a matter of how old you are. I remember when Steve Yzerman was drafted, and was the face on every Burger King cup and the Wings were simply delighted with the concept of making the playoffs. The whole idea of Detroit winning a cup was unfathomable, after all, it had been 40 years.

Guess I'm just saying all streaks end and begin, although to be honest, Detroit really should have too much talent for that streak to end. Then again, tons of teams with tons of talent have been golfing early these last 4 or 5 years.

[Guest Crymson]

Nothing is given. The more certain you are that they're gonna make it, the more heartbroken you'll be if they don't.

This is exactly the definition of defensive pessimism. You consider yourself a fan of the team, yet will not hope for and support them to the utmost because you are emotionally avoidant.

You don't need to save other people from disappointment. When one supports someone or something, one accepts the possibility of disappointment. If desire to avoid disappointment is prevalent in your experience with the individual or organization in question, then you really aren't a supporter of them nearly as much as those who are willing to hope in spite of the possibility for disappointment.

Edited February 28, 2010 by Crymson

[titanium2 867]

This is exactly the definition of defensive pessimism. You consider yourself a fan of the team, yet will not hope for and support them to the utmost because you are emotionally avoidant.

You don't need to save other people from disappointment. When one supports someone or something, one accepts the possibility of disappointment. If desire to avoid disappointment is prevalent in your experience with the individual or organization in question, then you really aren't a supporter of them nearly as much as those who are willing to hope in spite of the possibility for disappointment.

Gutsy post.

[Guest Howard He Do It?!]

This is exactly the definition of defensive pessimism. You consider yourself a fan of the team, yet will not hope for and support them to the utmost because you are emotionally avoidant.

You don't need to save other people from disappointment. When one supports someone or something, one accepts the possibility of disappointment. If desire to avoid disappointment is prevalent in your experience with the individual or organization in question, then you really aren't a supporter of them nearly as much as those who are willing to hope in spite of the possibility for disappointment.

I believe this to be a fair assessment.

With hockey, and sports in general, you have to be willing to be disappointed sometimes. It would be impossible to be a sports fan if you were unable to accept disappointment.

I am fully aware that the Red Wings may not make the playoffs this season. Will I be disappointed if they don't? Of course I will and I will not be alone in feeling that. However, that is not going to stop me from believing that they will make the playoffs. Sometimes you believe in something and you aren't disappointed. It's a two-way street and you have to be willing to accept the sheer joy of victory and the utter disappointment of defeat.

[Guest Howard He Do It?!]

He was the only professional journalist I read who said that. I remember that list offering very little tangible evidence. Kind of embarrassing.

Well, this is his article from 2009 dissecting who will win the Cup and there is not one mention of Quenneville. Perhaps it is in a different article from the WCF.

MLive

[titanium2 867]

Well, this is his article from 2009 dissecting who will win the Cup and there is not one mention of Quenneville. Perhaps it is in a different article from the WCF.

MLive

He published another after that one; before Game 7.

[Guest Howard He Do It?!]

He published another after that one; before Game 7.

Found the article in question. I don't think I would discredit Ansar because of one little paragraph at the end of an article. This was not his only article of the SCF. There are several more that go way more in depth. This was kind of a short summary article before Game 7.

MLive

[titanium2 867]

Found the article in question. I don't think I would discredit Ansar because of one little paragraph at the end of an article. This was not his only article of the SCF. There are several more that go way more in depth. This was kind of a short summary article before Game 7.

MLive

Other than Osgood's play, there was nothing all that tangible about his arguments. History, home ice and Quennville does not win you games. And "Hossa is due" should've really been a cause for concern. Somehow the fact that the Wings' bottom six weren't better than the opponent's eluded him.

[Guest Howard He Do It?!]

Other than Osgood's play, there was nothing all that tangible about his arguments. History, home ice and Quennville does not win you games. And "Hossa is due" should've really been a cause for concern. Somehow the fact that the Wings' bottom six weren't better than the opponent's eluded him.

Like I said, this article is really noting but a sum up article and really isn't an in depth analysis.

[ShanahanMan 473]

This is exactly the definition of defensive pessimism. You consider yourself a fan of the team, yet will not hope for and support them to the utmost because you are emotionally avoidant.

You don't need to save other people from disappointment. When one supports someone or something, one accepts the possibility of disappointment. If desire to avoid disappointment is prevalent in your experience with the individual or organization in question, then you really aren't a supporter of them nearly as much as those who are willing to hope in spite of the possibility for disappointment.

Defensive? Not really. Pessimistic? Try realistic. I truly love how you pull how I feel about the team straight out of your ass, considering what you said isn't close to what I said. When the hell did I ever say that I don't hope for or support the Wings? Theres a big difference between hoping the team will make it and saying it with blind certainty. Do I hope the team will make it? You're god damn right I do. I'm on here, pulling for the team every god damn game. You act like just because I'm not throwing my hands in the air saying, "Oh we got this" , I don't support my team. The fact is, there are about four teams we are in serious competition with. The fact is, we are currently (though it may be by one point) out of a playoff spot. The fact is, other teams are gonna have to fail for us to succeed. Do I hope they make it? Hell yes. Do I think they will? I'd say more likely then not, they won't. Maybe like 45% or so. Its not like I'm saying they don't have a chance, they do. I'm simply saying 'We'll see what happens'.

I will always love this team, I will always support this team. But if you're idea of fandom is making blind "certain" assumptions, and being content with s***ty play and frequent loses, then you're the one who only has a passive interest (at best) with this team.

Edited February 28, 2010 by ShanahanMan

[TACKS 0]

I like the chances of the wings in the playoffs.........

But I'm looking at these next 21 games as if we were playing them next fall.

Can we win 14 of the next 21?....Could we start off next fall with this team and be hungry enough for a cup next year?

Or will we win 7 or 8 games and not see the chemistry that we are all wanting to see?

With a healthy team and a favorable schedule, these 21 games should give the coaches and the fans a great look at where we might be next year. If the team isn't hungry now, then will they be hungry next fall??????

Frustrating season, but has been great watching the young talent come in and keep us in the hunt !!!!!!

Go wings!!!!!!!!!!!

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

We shall see...

Hopefully this is the case...

[VM1138 1,921]

He was the only professional journalist I read who said that. I remember that list offering very little tangible evidence. Kind of embarrassing.

The Wings came two shots away from winning the Cup. I fail to see how that is some hugely embarassing, unprofessional prediction of Kahn's.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

I'd say it's about 50/50 at best.

There's just too many teams fighting for too few spots, now that Los Angeles, Vancouver and Phoenix have pulled away from the competition.

Someone will go on a long winning streak, and the Wings better be that team.

[Guest Crymson]

Defensive? Not really. Pessimistic? Try realistic. I truly love how you pull how I feel about the team straight out of your ass, considering what you said isn't close to what I said. When the hell did I ever say that I don't hope for or support the Wings? Theres a big difference between hoping the team will make it and saying it with blind certainty. Do I hope the team will make it? You're god damn right I do. I'm on here, pulling for the team every god damn game. You act like just because I'm not throwing my hands in the air saying, "Oh we got this" , I don't support my team. The fact is, there are about four teams we are in serious competition with. The fact is, we are currently (though it may be by one point) out of a playoff spot. The fact is, other teams are gonna have to fail for us to succeed. Do I hope they make it? Hell yes. Do I think they will? I'd say more likely then not, they won't. Maybe like 45% or so. Its not like I'm saying they don't have a chance, they do. I'm simply saying 'We'll see what happens'.

I will always love this team, I will always support this team. But if you're idea of fandom is making blind "certain" assumptions, and being content with s***ty play and frequent loses, then you're the one who only has a passive interest (at best) with this team.

How does "I'm not going to be fully hopeful because if I do, I'll be more disappointed than if I hadn't" equate to 'realistic'? That statement says absolutely nothing about being 'realistic'. All it speaks of is avoiding disappointment. This, too, ignores the fact that 'realistic' holds no place when it comes to hope in this situation. What do you have to lose (besides risking disappointment) by being hopeful?

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

How does "I'm not going to be fully hopeful because if I do, I'll be more disappointed than if I hadn't" equate to 'realistic'? That statement says absolutely nothing about being 'realistic'. All it speaks of is avoiding disappointment. This, too, ignores the fact that 'realistic' holds no place when it comes to hope in this situation. What do you have to lose (besides risking disappointment) by being hopeful?

What do you care if other people have hope or not about the Wings making the playoffs?

Are you a parishioner or something?

You sound like a broken record already constantly talking about this banwagoner related talk.

Edited February 28, 2010 by GMRwings1983

[BuckeyeWingsfan80 209]

I hope this happens, but if any year this was to occur, this was the one.

I am pretty certain we'll see the Wings back in the playoffs next year if nothing else. This year was going to be tough coming in with a shortened summer, a lot of injuries that needed healing both in the off-season and in-season, and a really weird string of bad luck for much of December and January.

Let's just hope it happens. I do think this team, when healthy, can play with anyone in the west.