Portland and Everett clinched playoff spots last night. Well, technically they didn't - they only clinched a tie for the last playoff spot with Seattle, and since the WHL breaks ties for 8th place with tiebreaker games and not wins or head-to-head record or anything like that, I suppose it is technically possible that one of those teams could lose all their remaining games (in regulation of course), have Seattle win all their remaining games, and then have Seattle win the tiebreaker game, thus causing Portland/Everett to miss the playoffs. I suppose it is also possible that I may be struck twice by lightning tonight while examining my winning lottery ticket.
For Portland, this is their first trip to the playoffs since 2005-06. That was so long ago that there is not a single player on their roster today who played in that postseason with them - and only two players left in the entire league (Thomas Frazee and Kurtis Mucha) who were on that last Hawks playoff team.
The Tips and Hawks join the Tri-City Americans as the three teams who have clinched playoff spots. Vancouver will be next to clinch a spot, with either one win or Seattle loss. Unless, you know, the lightning thing happens.
It's a sign of the differing depths of the two conferences that the West will soon have half their playoff spots spoken for, while the East still has none and likely won't have their first one until sometime next week. We all know which 8 teams are going to make the playoffs in the West - even if it's not mathematical for all of them yet - whereas the East could very well come down to the final week of the season to determine some spots.
And I think the biggest question about the East becomes less of a question each day. That being, of course, "will Regina make the playoffs?". I think it's nearly safe to say it: no, they aren't going to make the playoffs. They lost again last night and are five points out of a playoff spot now, with the teams ahead of them also holding 2-3 games in hand on the Pats. They can't afford these losses anymore.
The 8th place team in the East is still on pace for 78 points, so the Pats need to go 11-3-1 to get to that mark. 9 of their remaining 15 games are on the road (where they are a dismal .296) and they play 7 games against tough opponents like Brandon (three times), Calgary (once), Saskatoon (twice), and Vancouver (once). Pick three - those are the ones they can "afford" to lose. They need to win all the rest, and that's assuming they beat all the other average and weak opponents. Despite their trades to load up, it's over for the Pats.
On the other hand, about that lightning....
10 comments:
Seattle is so bad. What do they need to do to fix there problems?
They need to do what they are doing now rebuilding. I believe they are the youngest team in the league now. It's why Portland is so good now a few top picks in the bantam draft will do that for you.
Yup....it's not fun but Seattle fans have to ride it out. Generally, junior hockey is cyclical due to the high turnover - 25% of the players leave the league every year. You start young and get better as the players get older, then drop back down again when they graduate.
Good management can give you higher highs and bad management gives you lower lows, but all teams are going to have up and down years to some extent. This is Seattle's down year and I think almost everyone who follows the league expected it to be right from the start.
Seattle may be young but what if they are young and bad? Under the present management team the TBirds have regressed for 5 years... and if it wasn't for Pickard they would be behind Edmonton & PG in the standings...
So is it because managment is bad that has caused them regress for the last 5 year?
I think the GM should take some (if not the same or more as the coach) of the heat for the W-L record... IMO it's time for new faces there - in both spots
Alan,
Do you agree with Marty?
I don't agree that both the coach and GM should be replaced, no.
They haven't regressed for five straight years - this is going to be the first season since 03-04 where the team finishes under .500. Since then they have had 91, 76, 88, 91, and 75 point seasons and won three playoff rounds in five years.
A brilliant record of success? No, but not terrible either and I think it's comparable to what a good number of other teams have done in the last five years.
They are the youngest team in the league this year and with that considered, I don't think their record is that bad. Granted, I am watching this from afar, but I think we all expected them to be last in the division before the season started, so this isn't a surprising disappointment.
There's some good young players there....some quality 16 & 17 year olds who are going to be good players. They'll come back up the standings in the next year or two....
Alan Thanks for the response, I noted that you said, they both should not be replaced which left me to infer (strictly my interruption) that while you don't believe both should go but one of them should? The other question is while there similar to other records in the leagues they are a large market team does that have an barring in WHL?
Back from a great day at the Olympics ... IMO the point totals and the over .500 (but with 3 point games 500 isn't 500 any longer) mask the problem - The TBirds are bad and the rest of the US Division isn't... I'm not as high on their 16 & 17 year olds - except for Pickard - he's the real deal... Maybe this year they would be OK if they had a BC division schedule, but they don't...
Post a Comment