84 replies to this topic

[TigerDan]

First time poster, but I've been as big a wing nut as anyone my whole life. I've played the game my whole life and have coached for a while too. It's safe to say that I have more than a basic knowledge of hockey. I say all that to lead to this:

This is one of my biggest pet peaves with some of the Wings fans. I don't personally know anyone here, so I can't say anything about them. But, most of the negativity directed at Wings goaltenders over the last 15 years is due to a lack of in depth hockey knowledge. People need to realize that the Wings would be in the same place right now if Fleury was in net for us. Too many people see the opposing teams goalie stand on his head and say: "Osgood can't do that" and then blame a game like last night on Osgood. BULLSH!T.

The reality is that the Wings defense will never dictate that a goalie needs to stand on his head. What does that mean? It means a goalie can play average, but never have a chance to make up for it with the fairweather fans by playing like Fleury did last night. The best Osgood can do towards "standing on his head" is show up and have a 20 save shutout (SEE: Game 1 and Game 2). Fluery, on the other hand cna have games where he was good, but not spectacular (once again, SEE: Game 1 and Game 2) and everyone thinks he's god because he stole a game last night. Any true hockey fan knows that Osgood stole his share of games with the Islanders and the Blues, too. Heck, the Isles have only made the playoffs twice in the last 10 years --- guess who their goalie was for those two years. The truth is if Fluery (0r anyone else) were the Wings goalie the best you'd see of him would match what Osgood did in the first two games.

On top of that there is a big difference between stealing a game and costing a team a game. Last night, Fleury stole a game. Osgood did NOT cost us a game. Hasek DID cost us games 3 and 4 of the Nashville series (with poor goals). The goals scored on Osgood were not his fault. One was scored by our own defenseman and the tying goal that everyone complains about was probably the one that he had the least chance to stop. He had already made TWO saves and they scored on the third wack. Anyone that knows hockey knows this: When a shot comes from the slot (like the original shot did) and there is traffic down low, the defensemen need to clear the players and not allow them to get to rebounds. Not only did Pitt get to the rebound, they got to the second rebound as well. That is inexcusable -- Talbot should have been on his A$$.

All of that said, the real reason we lost is that we played poorly in the first period. We came out flat and got down by two (bounces or no, Pitt had plenty of opportunities). In fact we started the 2nd poorly until we got a break of our own. If we played like we did in the 3rd, all of the rest is a moot point.

[interminded]

First time poster, but I've been as big a wing nut as anyone my whole life. I've played the game my whole life and have coached for a while too. It's safe to say that I have more than a basic knowledge of hockey. I say all that to lead to this:

This is one of my biggest pet peaves with some of the Wings fans. I don't personally know anyone here, so I can't say anything about them. But, most of the negativity directed at Wings goaltenders over the last 15 years is due to a lack of in depth hockey knowledge. People need to realize that the Wings would be in the same place right now if Fleury was in net for us. Too many people see the opposing teams goalie stand on his head and say: "Osgood can't do that" and then blame a game like last night on Osgood. BULLSH!T.

The reality is that the Wings defense will never dictate that a goalie needs to stand on his head. What does that mean? It means a goalie can play average, but never have a chance to make up for it with the fairweather fans by playing like Fleury did last night. The best Osgood can do towards "standing on his head" is show up and have a 20 save shutout (SEE: Game 1 and Game 2). Fluery, on the other hand cna have games where he was good, but not spectacular (once again, SEE: Game 1 and Game 2) and everyone thinks he's god because he stole a game last night. Any true hockey fan knows that Osgood stole his share of games with the Islanders and the Blues, too. Heck, the Isles have only made the playoffs twice in the last 10 years --- guess who their goalie was for those two years. The truth is if Fluery (0r anyone else) were the Wings goalie the best you'd see of him would match what Osgood did in the first two games.

On top of that there is a big difference between stealing a game and costing a team a game. Last night, Fleury stole a game. Osgood did NOT cost us a game. Hasek DID cost us games 3 and 4 of the Nashville series (with poor goals). The goals scored on Osgood were not his fault. One was scored by our own defenseman and the tying goal that everyone complains about was probably the one that he had the least chance to stop. He had already made TWO saves and they scored on the third wack. Anyone that knows hockey knows this: When a shot comes from the slot (like the original shot did) and there is traffic down low, the defensemen need to clear the players and not allow them to get to rebounds. Not only did Pitt get to the rebound, they got to the second rebound as well. That is inexcusable -- Talbot should have been on his A$$.

All of that said, the real reason we lost is that we played poorly in the first period. We came out flat and got down by two (bounces or no, Pitt had plenty of opportunities). In fact we started the 2nd poorly until we got a break of our own. If we played like we did in the 3rd, all of the rest is a moot point.

Amen !!!

(that's one hell of a first post.. )

[barnettkid14]

I normally dont post, just come on to see the news around the league and such... but STFU... Ozzy could stand on his head ten times over and people like you wouldn't be satisified. Would you rather Hasek be in net? Oh wait.. we tried that, not to bash on Hasek but if he were in net... it might be DALLAS in the finals right now. Goaltending is huge in this game, but somethings do happen like... oh I dono we score on our own net... take stupid penalties in the 3rd OT... things like that, the OZZY can't really have any effect on... why dont you go try out for the Wings goaltending position buddy, eff people like you make me mad :@

[C-Dub]

I normally dont post, just come on to see the news around the league and such... but STFU...

Amen!

Go Ozzie and go WINGS!!!

[DatsMyWings13]

Ozzie was fine, he is not the reason we lost. Puck luck is what it was all about last night and the bounces just didn't go our way.

[OsGOD]

Haha i kinda like this thread... the OP is so tongue and cheek... isn't (s)he?

[Jasper84]

Osgood had no chance at the first two goals, and the 4th goal, and no support for the 3rd. He isn't to blame at all

Which goal was ozzie's fault? the one where Kronwall put it in our own net off his skate? Maybe the one in 3OT's with a double minor and 4 guys with no energy to help him out??

Watch some more hockey and make an intelligent comment about goaltending.

And sorry, but I had to point this out. It wasn't off his skate, he clearly shot it into Ozzie's high stick side.

[OsGOD]

And sorry, but I had to point this out. It wasn't off his skate, he clearly shot it into Ozzie's high stick side.

I thought that too... but it wasn't right off his stick.. it was deflected off of the pens player

[Jasper84]

Ah I thought he was saying it went off of Kronner's skate, my bad. Either way though, I didn't see it hit the Pens player's slate until now. Makes the situation a lot easier to swallow, thanks for pointing it out.

[PaVel DaTsYuK fan13]

Ozzy made a lot of saves to keep that game alive in the first period, and the goals he let in weren't imposible, but they were by no means soft. Ozzie has been a rock, and I expect him to respond with a solid outing tomorrow.

Go Wings.

[OsGOD]

Ah I thought he was saying it went off of Kronner's skate, my bad. Either way though, I didn't see it hit the Pens player's slate until now. Makes the situation a lot easier to swallow, thanks for pointing it out.

Yeah i know what you mean... i feel a lot better this morning knowing that he didn't fire it in himself... a silver lining

[Viperar]

wow thats a whole new perspective on that goal

[GoWings1905]

What a stupid thread. It could have been 6-0 Penguins, instead of 2-0 if not for Ozzie. There was NO defense played by the Red Wings for the first period and a half. They were sloppy, the passing was terrible, and as a result Pittsburgh had a ton of great scoring chances, and odd-man rushes.

The Red Wings don't even get close to overtime if not for Chris Osgood. Quit trying to blame the loss on the one guy that gave them a chance to come back last night.

[IrishWing19]

First time poster, but I've been as big a wing nut as anyone my whole life. I've played the game my whole life and have coached for a while too. It's safe to say that I have more than a basic knowledge of hockey. I say all that to lead to this:

This is one of my biggest pet peaves with some of the Wings fans. I don't personally know anyone here, so I can't say anything about them. But, most of the negativity directed at Wings goaltenders over the last 15 years is due to a lack of in depth hockey knowledge. People need to realize that the Wings would be in the same place right now if Fleury was in net for us. Too many people see the opposing teams goalie stand on his head and say: "Osgood can't do that" and then blame a game like last night on Osgood. BULLSH!T.

The reality is that the Wings defense will never dictate that a goalie needs to stand on his head. What does that mean? It means a goalie can play average, but never have a chance to make up for it with the fairweather fans by playing like Fleury did last night. The best Osgood can do towards "standing on his head" is show up and have a 20 save shutout (SEE: Game 1 and Game 2). Fluery, on the other hand cna have games where he was good, but not spectacular (once again, SEE: Game 1 and Game 2) and everyone thinks he's god because he stole a game last night. Any true hockey fan knows that Osgood stole his share of games with the Islanders and the Blues, too. Heck, the Isles have only made the playoffs twice in the last 10 years --- guess who their goalie was for those two years. The truth is if Fluery (0r anyone else) were the Wings goalie the best you'd see of him would match what Osgood did in the first two games.

On top of that there is a big difference between stealing a game and costing a team a game. Last night, Fleury stole a game. Osgood did NOT cost us a game. Hasek DID cost us games 3 and 4 of the Nashville series (with poor goals). The goals scored on Osgood were not his fault. One was scored by our own defenseman and the tying goal that everyone complains about was probably the one that he had the least chance to stop. He had already made TWO saves and they scored on the third wack. Anyone that knows hockey knows this: When a shot comes from the slot (like the original shot did) and there is traffic down low, the defensemen need to clear the players and not allow them to get to rebounds. Not only did Pitt get to the rebound, they got to the second rebound as well. That is inexcusable -- Talbot should have been on his A$$.

All of that said, the real reason we lost is that we played poorly in the first period. We came out flat and got down by two (bounces or no, Pitt had plenty of opportunities). In fact we started the 2nd poorly until we got a break of our own. If we played like we did in the 3rd, all of the rest is a moot point.

Best first post ever!

[shanny is the man]

I stand with Ozzie, 100 percent.

NOW AMEN, CAN I GET A WITNESS?

[pucker4fischer]

3rd goal - made initial save but NEVER got his skate/pad against the post at any point. If he does that, that puck doesn't go in. Sorry, but Ozzie is at fault (as is Franzen, who had a chance to clear the puck but didn't)

I was screaming it at the last few games. I don't know you've notice that his post side is his weak side. He cheats off of it. Crosby, Hossa, now Talbot and maybe someother goal I can't remember, have been scoring from there. I need to get on the phone with Jim Berdard.

I love you Oz but you reallly need think about hugging them posts.

[TigerDan]

Best first post ever!

TY

[CrossoverThrash]

Osgood was fine, he had a fluke goal and a 6 on 5 goal, and one on a 4 min powerplay in 3rd OT, fluery was lucky, give Ozzie a break

Edited by CrossoverThrash, 03 June 2008 - 10:21 AM.

[cirov19]

Ozzy had absolutely nothing to do with last nights loss.

You can't win if you don't score.
Argument over.

Last night isn't important because the Wings are gonna win game 6.
It WILL happen.

[eva unit zero]

I was screaming it at the last few games. I don't know you've notice that his post side is his weak side. He cheats off of it. Crosby, Hossa, now Talbot and maybe someother goal I can't remember, have been scoring from there. I need to get on the phone with Jim Berdard.

I love you Oz but you reallly need think about hugging them posts.

Now to be fair, all of the goals you've mentioned have been rebound chances where there are more than one Penguins player down low. When does that ever happen at the other end?
I've been thinking for a while that Detroit's one defensive weakness is clearing the crease. The Penguins are exploiting that weakness. That weakness is why Chelios and Lilja were both playing ahead of Lebda.
Yes, Osgood was off the post. Why? because he was stopping a shot that was coming from the slot. No goaltender hugs the post in that situation. Filppula's flying goal is a better example of a goaltender failing to get to the post when he needed to.
If Kronwall doesn't put that puck past Ozzie, and everything else happens the same way, then Osgood has a Conn Smythe trophy over his head last night.