Kp-Wings 3 Report post Posted October 30, 2007 what i love most about this deal is that it stabliizes the FA market.. HOPEFULLY. Clowns like Kevin Lowe throw a stick of dynamite into the FA pool, in an attempt to bring the rest of the league down with their s***ty organization. You would never see Holland or Sutter be a bonehead.. and deals like this only help to keep players in cities they want to be in Why is everyone so bitchy over what Lowe did last summer? The guy was trying to improve his team. Although he majorly overpaid for Penner and in his attempt for Vanek, that's what you have to do to get RFA's, because small offers are easily matched. Plus, it's the only option he has when the free agent market dries up and their are no good players left. What Lowe did was perfectly legal, so when guys like Brian Burke complain like they do, he only does because he's pissed off that he lost a player. If Lowe would have gotten Vanek instead, I'm sure he and Burke would still be best buddies right now like before. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DetroitIan Report post Posted October 30, 2007 Frankly, its a crock of s*** to say that Osgood can't win a cup again. Osgood can't win the cup again....as a starter that is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
YoungGuns1340 1 Report post Posted October 30, 2007 Osgood can't win the cup again....as a starter that is. Thats the stupidest thing Ive ever read. There is absolutely no proof for that statement. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kp-Wings 3 Report post Posted October 30, 2007 Frankly, its a crock of s*** to say that Osgood can't win a cup again. Osgood can't win a Cup again. There, I said it. (I'm joking of course) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
YoungGuns1340 1 Report post Posted October 30, 2007 Kris Draper cant ever hit the 20 goal mark again either. Despite already being a quarter of the way there with 70 games left. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
puckloo39 5,686 Report post Posted October 30, 2007 My word. How did this turn into an Ozzie-bashing thread? Congrat to Kipper, who is obviously with the team he intends to play for, and to the Flames for cementing their goaltending needs for a good long while. We should be so lucky. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Detroit # 1 Fan 2,204 Report post Posted October 30, 2007 Why so much Ozzie hate? This isnt 05-06, He's playing fantastic and at this point, better then Dom. I like them both, but to say Ozzie isnt a cup winning goalie, and Dom is, is just a bias. Both can and will do it this year, TOGETHER. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grittzkey 1 Report post Posted October 30, 2007 1 STEP CLOSER TO HOWARD BEING A STARTER Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bannedforlife 403 Report post Posted October 30, 2007 a goalie who hasn't started a nhl game is his career, and a goalie that would preform like manny legace in the playoffs im sure, no...maybe if osgood wasnt a back up for the last 5 years Actually, Howard started 4 games in 05-06, posting a 1-2 record with 2.99 GAA and .904% save percentage. And I'm sure he'll see a couple of games this year as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SweWings 45 Report post Posted October 30, 2007 Congrats to the Flames! The contract length + $ per year is insane - I wish we had that security. Here's to hoping Lids signs for that amount too - it's certainly comparable, well at least sort of... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted October 30, 2007 Holy crap I can't believe they got him for so cheap. Wow. Nice job by the Flames. It's hard not to wonder if the Wings would've had a another Cup or two if they had a true franchise guy. New Jersey has Brodeur, Colorado had Roy. If the Wings would've had an equivalent, who knows what they would've done... I long for the day they have a true franchise goaltender so the carousel in net will finally spin to a stop. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wingslogo19 281 Report post Posted October 30, 2007 Great move by the Flames, and a move they had to do.. he's in the top 5 best goalies IMO Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spongewingredpants 75 Report post Posted October 30, 2007 Gerber, Gerber, Gerber!!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
T.Low 1,011 Report post Posted October 31, 2007 (edited) Why so much Ozzie hate? This isnt 05-06, He's playing fantastic and at this point, better then Dom. I like them both, but to say Ozzie isnt a cup winning goalie, and Dom is, is just a bias. Both can and will do it this year, TOGETHER. Oh c'mon. You act like Osgood is 6-0 and is top five in all three goalie stats or something... Uhm, yes, I'd like to purchase one ticket for the Ozzie Train to Lord Stanley's Cup, please. All ABOARD!!! Edited October 31, 2007 by T.Low Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LIDDYGIBBY5 1 Report post Posted October 31, 2007 a goalie who hasn't started a nhl game is his career, and a goalie that would preform like manny legace in the playoffs im sure, no...maybe if osgood wasnt a back up for the last 5 years There was a time when Hasek, Broduer, Roy, Luongo, Sawchuck, Esposito, etc. hadn't started a game. Things turned out pretty well for them. Give the kid a chance before you decide that he can't hack it. If the league went by your hasn't started can't be good theory, who would we be watching?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eva unit zero 271 Report post Posted October 31, 2007 Holy crap I can't believe they got him for so cheap. Wow. Nice job by the Flames. It's hard not to wonder if the Wings would've had a another Cup or two if they had a true franchise guy. New Jersey has Brodeur, Colorado had Roy. If the Wings would've had an equivalent, who knows what they would've done... I long for the day they have a true franchise goaltender so the carousel in net will finally spin to a stop. Hmm... In which years of 1995, 1996, 1999, 2000, or 2001 did the Red Wings lose because the starting goaltending played poorly while the team played well enough to win? Hmm...not once? The only argument can be made for 1999, and that was an injury situation where Osgood's knee was injured after dominating the Ducks, and came into the Avs series well before he was recovered to try and rescue the team after Ranford blew monkey nuts in Games 3 and 4. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Hatethedrake! Report post Posted October 31, 2007 I just hate it when hockey players blow monkey nuts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted October 31, 2007 Hmm... In which years of 1995, 1996, 1999, 2000, or 2001 did the Red Wings lose because the starting goaltending played poorly while the team played well enough to win? Hmm...not once? The only argument can be made for 1999, and that was an injury situation where Osgood's knee was injured after dominating the Ducks, and came into the Avs series well before he was recovered to try and rescue the team after Ranford blew monkey nuts in Games 3 and 4. I wasn't saying that they necessarily lost because of bad goaltending, but that's still not the same has having a Brodeur or Roy between the pipes. A true #1 franchise guy of that caliber would've made a difference. Especially considering having that position shored up season after season would allow management to focus their attention elsewhere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eva unit zero 271 Report post Posted October 31, 2007 I wasn't saying that they necessarily lost because of bad goaltending, but that's still not the same has having a Brodeur or Roy between the pipes. A true #1 franchise guy of that caliber would've made a difference. Especially considering having that position shored up season after season would allow management to focus their attention elsewhere. Maybe. I prefer to look at it this way. During the period from 95 to 2003, The Devils had comparable regular season successes to the Wings, and Brodeur won three Cups. Counting the 94-95 season as .57 seasons, the Wings averaged 109 points per season to New Jersey's 102. The Wings averaged 237 goals for and 198 goals against per season to New Jersey's 236/189. So it's not like there was a huge difference in goals at either end between Brodeur's ACTUAL team and the Wings teams you wanted him on. Yet Brodeur won three Cups and so did the Wings. That implies that over that period, that the Wings' goaltenders were Brodeur's equal when it came to postseason results. Let's take a look at Roy's Avalanche in the stretch from 96 to 2003. 103 points, 255 goals for, 201 goals against per season. Two Cups. Roy's teams were significantly better offensively than the contemporary Detroit or New Jersey teams, while allowing a comparable number of goals. So Roy had BETTER offensive support than the Wings netminders yet won less in the same span...and having him is supposed to guarantee that we'll have won more, when goaltending wasn't the issue to begin with? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dabura 12,232 Report post Posted October 31, 2007 Maybe. I prefer to look at it this way. During the period from 95 to 2003, The Devils had comparable regular season successes to the Wings, and Brodeur won three Cups. Counting the 94-95 season as .57 seasons, the Wings averaged 109 points per season to New Jersey's 102. The Wings averaged 237 goals for and 198 goals against per season to New Jersey's 236/189. So it's not like there was a huge difference in goals at either end between Brodeur's ACTUAL team and the Wings teams you wanted him on. Yet Brodeur won three Cups and so did the Wings. That implies that over that period, that the Wings' goaltenders were Brodeur's equal when it came to postseason results. Let's take a look at Roy's Avalanche in the stretch from 96 to 2003. 103 points, 255 goals for, 201 goals against per season. Two Cups. Roy's teams were significantly better offensively than the contemporary Detroit or New Jersey teams, while allowing a comparable number of goals. So Roy had BETTER offensive support than the Wings netminders yet won less in the same span...and having him is supposed to guarantee that we'll have won more, when goaltending wasn't the issue to begin with? Dude. He's just saying a true franchise 'minder would have helped. Can't really argue with that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
norrisnick 1 Report post Posted October 31, 2007 Holy crap I can't believe they got him for so cheap. Wow. Nice job by the Flames. It's hard not to wonder if the Wings would've had a another Cup or two if they had a true franchise guy. New Jersey has Brodeur, Colorado had Roy. If the Wings would've had an equivalent, who knows what they would've done... I long for the day they have a true franchise goaltender so the carousel in net will finally spin to a stop. There are rumors abound out of Finland (via Kipper's agent) that Kipper doesn't really intend to play all 6 seasons and is treating this as a 4 year deal. Thus the 2 super cheap years tacked on at the end are only there to drop the cap hit of the contract. If the League catches a whiff of this being some sort of wink wink nudge nudge agreement between Kipper and Sutter there could be troubles for the Flames. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted October 31, 2007 Dude. He's just saying a true franchise 'minder would have helped. Can't really argue with that. exactly. I didn't think it was a very controversial statement. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
isbister 0 Report post Posted October 31, 2007 Isn't Lundquist a un-restricted free agent next year? Hell I would rather a a Swed!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
norrisnick 1 Report post Posted October 31, 2007 Isn't Lundquist a un-restricted free agent next year? Hell I would rather a a Swed!!! Nope. Restricted. He doesn't have 7 years of service nor is he 27. And the Rangers will match pretty much any offer, seeing as they took him to arbitration this past offseason for the sole reason that it would prevent other teams from tendering an offer sheet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FinRedWing 172 Report post Posted October 31, 2007 Isn't Lundquist a un-restricted free agent next year? Hell I would rather a a Swed!!! You'd rather have a Swedish goalie than a Finnish one? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
