• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
wingsfan27

trade proposal ...listen up kenny! lol

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

This argument always makes me laugh.

People talk about how great the defense was for Osgood. These same people also talk about how terrible Anders Eriksson is/was.

Well, which is it? Is Eriksson terrible, or did his replacing Konstantinov in Detroit's top four improve the Wings as dramatically as many seem to suggest.

I'll put it this simply; Holland felt that Detroit needed to upgrade on defense in 98. Dmitri Mironov was acquired. Mironov was BEHIND Eriksson on the depth chart.

Osgood was second in Smythe voting and led the team in three-star selections in the playoffs. He was by no means the 'peripheral piece' Ozzie bashers like to suggest. He was MORE IMPORTANT to the 98 Cup than Fedorov, Lidstrom, Shanahan, or anyone else who didn't win the Smythe that year. Yzerman won the Smythe because he was UNREAL, and it should have been his second in a row.

Unless of course you are suggesting any decent goalie can be the second most valuable player in the postseason for a repeating cup winner?

Oh..and you may have forgotten, but Osgood also was robbed of the Vezina in 96. It's hard to argue that anyone saying he is good is doing so based on his Cup considering he was a Second-team all-star before ever being a cup winner. He also was 10th in Vezina voting in 95 as a backup.

Face it, Osgood was and is a good goalie. Just because he's not Patrick Roy or Terry Sawchuk doesn't mean he sucks. There's a HUGE difference between those categories.

Though your argument supported by PAST facts is good, and is full of information of Osgoods PAST, it doesn't prove that he is good now. Yes, he WAS a great goalie, but is he now. He obviously has done something bad to get a bunch of people rattled about his abilitys of goaltending.

I don't really read the statistics of Osgoods season so far, but I have watched pretty much every game this year, and he's had some good games, and his bad games like anyone else. But so many of the goals this guy lets in makes me want to puke. Like the second Edmonton game, first goal. That one stands out in my mind. If he had done nothing, the goal would have gone over the crease completely to the other side of rink, but he dives and it banks off his head into the net. And even though in 1998, he did in fact come in 2nd in the Conn Smythe trophy voting, lets not forget those center ice goals he let in, one which was going wide in OT V.S Dallas.

He also lets out big rebounds, though he does make amazing saves some time. I can't call him a terrible goalie, but considering his experience, i'm sure Ken Holland can trade him for someone decent, and hopefully, he finds a better and more consistent back-up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This argument always makes me laugh.

People talk about how great the defense was for Osgood. These same people also talk about how terrible Anders Eriksson is/was.

Well, which is it? Is Eriksson terrible, or did his replacing Konstantinov in Detroit's top four improve the Wings as dramatically as many seem to suggest.

I'll put it this simply; Holland felt that Detroit needed to upgrade on defense in 98. Dmitri Mironov was acquired. Mironov was BEHIND Eriksson on the depth chart.

Osgood was second in Smythe voting and led the team in three-star selections in the playoffs. He was by no means the 'peripheral piece' Ozzie bashers like to suggest. He was MORE IMPORTANT to the 98 Cup than Fedorov, Lidstrom, Shanahan, or anyone else who didn't win the Smythe that year. Yzerman won the Smythe because he was UNREAL, and it should have been his second in a row.

Unless of course you are suggesting any decent goalie can be the second most valuable player in the postseason for a repeating cup winner?

Oh..and you may have forgotten, but Osgood also was robbed of the Vezina in 96. It's hard to argue that anyone saying he is good is doing so based on his Cup considering he was a Second-team all-star before ever being a cup winner. He also was 10th in Vezina voting in 95 as a backup.

Face it, Osgood was and is a good goalie. Just because he's not Patrick Roy or Terry Sawchuk doesn't mean he sucks. There's a HUGE difference between those categories.

Though your argument supported by PAST facts is good, and is full of information of Osgoods PAST, it doesn't prove that he is good now. Yes, he WAS a great goalie, but is he now. He obviously has done something bad to get a bunch of people rattled about his abilitys of goaltending.

I don't really read the statistics of Osgoods season so far, but I have watched pretty much every game this year, and he's had some good games, and his bad games like anyone else. But so many of the goals this guy lets in makes me want to puke. Like the second Edmonton game, first goal. That one stands out in my mind. If he had done nothing, the goal would have gone over the crease completely to the other side of rink, but he dives and it banks off his head into the net. And even though in 1998, he did in fact come in 2nd in the Conn Smythe trophy voting, lets not forget those center ice goals he let in, one which was going wide in OT V.S Dallas.

He also lets out big rebounds, though he does make amazing saves some time. I can't call him a terrible goalie, but considering his experience, i'm sure Ken Holland can trade him for someone decent, and hopefully, he finds a better and more consistent back-up.

Umm...

Wasn't I responding to a post about the 98 Cup run? Why do I need to based an argument about 1998 on NOW instead of 1998?

And it's true, you can't just disregard the center ice goals.

But you have to remember--Osgood posted HUGE games afterwards, was second in Smythe voting in SPITE of those goals and their high profile.

Oh, and also...Osgood was a Cup winning goaltender in 1998...so those single moments of penetrability can't have hurt the team too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Osgood sucks because he gave up a long OT goal in a playoff season in which they won a Stanley Cup!

Every goalie (even the ones that do not suck) gets burned once in awhile. These trade threads are so funny my face hurts from laughing -- stop it please! I have more work to do... laugh.gif

Edited by fightfan24

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Osgood sucks because he gave up a long OT goal in a playoff season in which they won a Satnley Cup!

Every goalie (even the ones that do not suck) gets burned once in awhile. These trade threads are so funny my face hurts from laughing -- stop it please! I have more work to do... laugh.gif

Thank you...that first sentence is the statement I have been trying to make for 8 years, to no avail. laugh.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You do make some good points, and I too would like to have Havlat. That being said, I don't think the Sens would do that anyway.

Now I have to admit I don't know much about this Mika Noronen whom your throwing into the equation, but I wouldn't trade Hudler away for a goalie. We have enough goalies in our systems don't we?

Also, what is Havlat's salary?

This season he's getting $2.6 million.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wings won't make any significant trades because they don't have the cap space. Hudler, Datsyk,Zetterberg, Maltby,Chelios,Williams,Yzerman and every other major part of this team aren't going anywhere. Save the lopsided trades for NHL 06 because they aren't happening in reality.

biggrin.gifbiggrin.giflaugh.giflaugh.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think we all know that this trade isn't happening. It is a discussion. That's all.

To say Williams and Hudler ain't going anywhere because they are "major part of this team" is kinda overstating it I'd say.

But hey, it's a only a discussion anyway! smile.gif

And Havlat would be an even bigger part of the team. He's still young isn't he?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this