Doc Holiday

So scouts don't look at physicality when it comes to whether they should be picked up? Sure it is only one thing, but if a player busts his ass every shift and does everything he can to help his team, then hell yes he is going to have a better chance than the guy who coasts around and attempts to do pretty s*** to get noticed.
And once again, some players don't even have a shot, so why should they let up if this may be the last competitive league they ever play in?

You know not every player in the OHL moves on from there and plays more competitive hockey.
As a player, I will go for every hit I can make if I know my chances of making the NHL are slim and nil (and especially if I could have the chance to make it but need the extra oomph).
You do make a good point, but are players who probably will never play in the NHL supposed to coddle these young guys simply for development's sake?

That wasn't a dirty hit. You DON'T turn your back on another player bearing down on you at the last second.
No way you can react when you are inches away from the guy.

ive been quite critical of osgoods sub-par play this year, but this is just getting old. youre beating a dead horse. osgood was decent yesterday, and without that soft first goal it would have been a completely different game.

In all of Howard's starts:
(for the sake of clarity I'm just going to use the "record" used before instead of listing every start and how he did.
18-11-12-12-2-1-1-2
So he was scored on within the first 10 minutes 18/58 times.
To compare:
Osgood's "f*** I got scored on early!" percentage: 42%
Howard's FIGSOE percentage: 31%
Not factoring in first shots (or shots within 5 minutes of the game) allowed for either goaltender.
Also Osgood's record in his last 10 starts was 2-6-2 before the Philly game.

In all of Osgood's starts:
Philadelphia: First shot
Minnesota: First shot
Washington: 18 minutes into the second period
Chicago: 7 minutes into the first, 7th shot on net
Nashville: 14 minutes into the second
New Jersey: 15 minutes into the first
Calgary: First shot
Nashville: 10 minutes into the first
Florida: 8 minutes into the third
Toronto: 10 minutes into the first
San Jose: 14 minutes into the second
Boston: Shut out
Calgary: 14 minutes into the second
Vancouver: Less than a minute into the first
Phoenix: 16 minutes into the first
Colorado: 9 minutes into the third
LA: 5 minutes into the first
Buffalo: 12 minutes into the first
Washington: 4 minutes into the first
Chicago: 1 minute into the second
St. Louis: 7 minutes into the first
So: (<10 into the first/<0 into the second/<10 into the second/<0 into the third/<10 into the third/>10 into the third/overtime/none against)
9-4-1-4-2-0-0-1
9/21 times Osgood has been scored on within 10 minutes of play. 4 of 21 on the first shot. Numbers could be off but that should be just about correct.
I'll do Howard later (that's what she said).

That's right. Instead of argue the post, go after the poster.
That brings an intellectual, civil discussion to the table.

That makes no sense. If Ozzy plays square on the player in the middle, he is cheating and leaving the net open for the puck carrier. He has to respect the shot but be ready for the pass.
Osgood was too aggressive on the shot, but Kronwall and Ericsson also misplayed it badly. Then there's also the point that it was a friggin 4 on 2.

It's always been funny how your overly-optimistic view of the Wings doesn't include Osgood.
Nothing approaches game conditions. Ozzy was rusty. He started awful, but got better, and made a few big saves in the third.
Osgood played the shot on the 4 on 2, which is what he's supposed to do. Why no comments about Bert's bad decision, Kronwall's awful job playing the pass, and Ericsson trying to cover two Flyers at once and ended up covering neither? Or Lebda deciding to help out Stuart by having them both cover the same man, leaving the entire left side of the ice open?
The Wings played below par, including Osgood. But I was surprised at how good he looked in the third. That was about the best to be hoped for after the awful start.

There are certain things one doesn't forget about goaltending.
1) How to make routine saves. This is done in practice all the time.
2) How to play odd man rushes correctly. Do NOT commit immediately to the first player and go several feet out of the net. This is a common sense matter for a goaltender.
3) How to track the puck and the play so that one can move and challenge where necessary. Once again, this is common sense.
I've just gone over the issues with Ozzie's first three goals against. None concerned being rusty. He just played well below par.

So now the Howard/Osgood debate has devolved into arguing about what you were arguing about... sweet.
Osgood has been awful all year. Maybe a tiny glimpse of greatness here and there... but nothing to hang your hat on by any means. The only hope at this point for Osgood is that Jimmy completely melts down (doubtful) or that he can get himself together enough to be a competent back-up next season.

Okay, but we are still talking about individual performances, and you are defending Howard's performance based on the fact he has been great the rest of the year.
Both weak goals were huge on the outcome of the game, but only one is berated for it, which is ridiculous. Not only berated, but multiple threads questioning him based on that performance.

That isn't what we are talking about. We are talking about two individual performances for two individual games.

Yes he did. The overtime goal was very stoppable.

Are you people actually interested in the results of that sham of an award?

Why do people forget that he complained about the fact Babcock was keeping BOTH goaltenders on the bench for extended periods of time?
Osgood wasn't complaining that HE wasn't getting starts, he was complaining that Babcock was not efficiently playing the goaltenders. Should he have been quiet? Yes. Was he being selfish? Absolutely not.

In short: no.
In long (actually list form):
1. He is on the cap next year regardless unless there is a buyout which ain't happenin.
2. It is possible someone would want a trade for him (veteran backup with 2 cup rings as a starter says hello) but it isn't likely considering his age.
3. Howard has explicitly stated how much Osgood has helped his development, and he will still need it next year if he doesn't want to end up like a Mason or Ellis.
4. Osgood has been dedicated to the Winged Wheel since he got here, and moving Osgood before allowing him to get his 400th win here would be a serious blemish on Detroit's almost perfect reputation of loyalty within the franchise. Players like that.