Osgood has worst save percentage in the league

[VM1138 1,921]

There has been a lot of talk about defence this year. Sure, there is room for improvement in our defence. But the statistics show that we have out-shot our opponents in 29 of 49 games this year. That is the best record in the league (SJS is second with 24). We have the fifth best defence in terms of shots against per game. So overall, even though our defence hasn't been as good as last year, it has still been one of the best in the league.

One stat sticks out one the negative side though: Osgood's save percentage of 88.0%. Out of all 44 goalies that have played this year, Osgood has the lowest save percentage. That's right - Osgood is in last place.

To me, save percentage is the only really relevant statistic for goalies. After all, stopping shots is what they are there for. How can Detroit expect to win the cup with the worst goalie in the league? Why are people focusing on the defence when goal-tending seems to be the obvious flaw in our roster? Our number one goalie is worse than the back-up on all other all other teams!

In my mind, we need to:

1) Short-term: Dump Osgood. Make Conklin number one, and bring up Larsson as the back-up (Larsson has a much better save percentage than Howard). To those who say Larsson isn't ready I contend that we already have the worst goalie in the league - Larsson only has to be better than one goalie to be an improvement on Osgood.

2) Long-term: Make room in the cap to acquire a goalie before the next trade dead-line. Any goalie. Remember - all other goalies in the league have performed better than Osgood.

Am I making sense?

(All stats are from nhl.com)

Those stats really opened my eyes. Our defense has been horrible, but apparently still better than most of the league. I don't think Ozzie should be dumped, but he's gotta be reduced to backup until he earns the top spot back.

[BigTex 1]

I hope the February Wallpaper comes out soon. the one from January is causing system crashing on my computer.

[Guest Crymson]

Thank God for idiots.

And since when was kissing Holland's ass at every chance considered a "substantial participation in any discussion"?

Sadly, your definition of "kissing Holland's ass" lies somewhere along the lines of "defending Holland at any point, ever." Given that you bash Holland at seemingly almost every opportunity---except for a notable period after the Cup win, during which you declared him a demigod amongst general managers---I'm sure it appears to you that I'm a consummate brown-noser. However, I don't think your definition is common---fortunately---and I find you to be all of spoiled, ungracious, and saddled with some odd feeling of entitlement toward the team. It sucks for you, frankly.

I don't know if all of that is just some in-character gimmick on your part; given how over-the-top and inane your persona seems to me, I think it's a possibility. If not, I'd suggest that bashing the most successful GM of the last decade---and one for whom fans of other team sing great praises---on a regular basis and acting as if you know better than he and the rest of the management team probably constitutes living somewhere outside of reality.

[HockeyCrazy3033 168]

Can someone bring me up to speed on this thread? I mean I know what the title of the thread is and all, but I can almost guarantee it probably took many turns and I don't feel like reading 8 pages.

[Guest Crymson]

Can someone bring me up to speed on this thread? I mean I know what the title of the thread is and all, but I can almost guarantee it probably took many turns and I don't feel like reading 8 pages.

The OP made a thread to whine and suggest a trade, then some people called the OP a moron for making the thread, while other people agreed and tried to play armchair GM as well, others refuted them, the armchair GMs started to get condescending, and finally the thread turned into a discussion about how these forums have been overrun by morons in the last few months, and some people came along to argue that.

It was nothing that hasn't been seen numerous times in the last week or two, and dozens of times since the start of the season. You're a nice person, HC, and you deserve to not be made dumber by such things, so please just stay away; I wish I had, but it's too late!

[BlueMonk 102]

Can someone bring me up to speed on this thread? I mean I know what the title of the thread is and all, but I can almost guarantee it probably took many turns and I don't feel like reading 8 pages.

"Ozzie sucks."

"No, he doesn't!"

"Yes, he does!"

"No, he doesn't!"

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

Sadly, your definition of "kissing Holland's ass" lies somewhere along the lines of "defending Holland at any point, ever." Given that you bash Holland at seemingly almost every opportunity---except for a notable period after the Cup win, during which you declared him a demigod amongst general managers---I'm sure it appears to you that I'm a consummate brown-noser. However, I don't think your definition is common---fortunately---and I find you to be all of spoiled, ungracious, and saddled with some odd feeling of entitlement toward the team. It sucks for you, frankly.

I don't know if all of that is just some in-character gimmick on your part; given how over-the-top and inane your persona seems to me, I think it's a possibility. If not, I'd suggest that bashing the most successful GM of the last decade---and one for whom fans of other team sing great praises---on a regular basis and acting as if you know better than he and the rest of the management team probably constitutes living somewhere outside of reality.

I love your description of me. I was exhilirated the whole time I was reading it, even though most of it was over the top and slightly inaccurate. Don't remember calling Holland a demigod, though.

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

One game certainly doesn't make/break a season, but Osgood deserves his fair share of credit tonight. He was as solid as you can get for that 5:00 major and the shootout. Can't really blame him for that last PP goal on the major as it was a solid deflection, pretty hard to not give up a goal when you are a man short for 5 minutes straight.

Yes I still get it that he hasn't played well for most of this season, etc.

[interminded 1]

Can someone bring me up to speed on this thread? I mean I know what the title of the thread is and all, but I can almost guarantee it probably took many turns and I don't feel like reading 8 pages.

Trade Ozzie

He sucks

He's horrible

Get Backstrom

And Luongo

And give Jimmy Howard a chance

and ride Conklin throughout the playoffs

Wait .. what ?

We can only have two goalies ?

eh... well...

At least trade Osgood for Toskala !

Ozzie's the worst !

Booooooooooh !!!

Last year was last year !

We want him gone... dead.... finished !

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHH !!

That's about it.

Nothing new really, just the same thread after every game Ozzie played, won or lost.

[Guest Crymson]

I love your description of me. I was exhilirated the whole time I was reading it, even though most of it was over the top and slightly inaccurate. Don't remember calling Holland a demigod, though.

That was a metaphor. You were singing his praises, that much is for sure.

Anyway, I think you're nuts. Enjoy your trip.

Edited February 3, 2009 by Crymson

[Inultus 12]

I read the first page and the last page and I just thought I'd throw something out there.

I'm not about to question and organization that is clearly dedicated to winning, but I am curious as to why the Wings never spend the money to get a big name goalie.

I mean obviously we are dealing with a cap scenario now but in hockey defense wins championships, so why skimp on it?

I mean sure Ozzy did well last year, he had a couple of clutch shutouts, but most people with common sense will agree that Ozzy is not the kind of goalie who will steal a series for you. Hasek, at the top of his game, was that kind of goalie so I can understand why we gave him one more chance.

[AtomicPunk 296]

I read the first page and the last page and I just thought I'd throw something out there.

I'm not about to question and organization that is clearly dedicated to winning, but I am curious as to why the Wings never spend the money to get a big name goalie.

I mean obviously we are dealing with a cap scenario now but in hockey defense wins championships, so why skimp on it?

I mean sure Ozzy did well last year, he had a couple of clutch shutouts, but most people with common sense will agree that Ozzy is not the kind of goalie who will steal a series for you. Hasek, at the top of his game, was that kind of goalie so I can understand why we gave him one more chance.

People have short memories.

1. Hasek. They spent the money to get the BIGGEST name goalie available. Also threw money at Curtis Joseph.

2. He won us a cup last year with 2 shutouts in the hugest games. You said it yourself. Stole that series by getting the Wings up 2-0. Endgame.

[boomer 0]

There has been a lot of talk about defence this year. Sure, there is room for improvement in our defence. But the statistics show that we have out-shot our opponents in 29 of 49 games this year. That is the best record in the league (SJS is second with 24). We have the fifth best defence in terms of shots against per game. So overall, even though our defence hasn't been as good as last year, it has still been one of the best in the league.

One stat sticks out one the negative side though: Osgood's save percentage of 88.0%. Out of all 44 goalies that have played this year, Osgood has the lowest save percentage. That's right - Osgood is in last place.

To me, save percentage is the only really relevant statistic for goalies. After all, stopping shots is what they are there for. How can Detroit expect to win the cup with the worst goalie in the league? Why are people focusing on the defence when goal-tending seems to be the obvious flaw in our roster? Our number one goalie is worse than the back-up on all other all other teams!

In my mind, we need to:

1) Short-term: Dump Osgood. Make Conklin number one, and bring up Larsson as the back-up (Larsson has a much better save percentage than Howard). To those who say Larsson isn't ready I contend that we already have the worst goalie in the league - Larsson only has to be better than one goalie to be an improvement on Osgood.

2) Long-term: Make room in the cap to acquire a goalie before the next trade dead-line. Any goalie. Remember - all other goalies in the league have performed better than Osgood.

Am I making sense?

(All stats are from nhl.com)

[boomer 0]

Listen your bang on in many respects. Dump Osgood how soon is now. Conklin you can't make him #1 they tried too and though I do like him as a battler- he's hasn't come up consistently enough. What are the options? Well trade to get a solid guy to platoon him with; such as a Roloson or Halak in Mtl - the latter is starter material given the chance ;and he's abattler like Conklin. Second option go for the gold and trade for top goaltender. Personally platooning Conklin is my preference. I look to what Boston has done with Manny Fernandez and Thomas - they got something going. Anyhow if management thinks that the playoffs with Osgood is an option then things really do stink in Denmark.

[OsGOD 3]

Listen your bang on in many respects. Dump Osgood how soon is now. Conklin you can't make him #1 they tried too and though I do like him as a battler- he's hasn't come up consistently enough. What are the options? Well trade to get a solid guy to platoon him with; such as a Roloson or Halak in Mtl - the latter is starter material given the chance ;and he's abattler like Conklin. Second option go for the gold and trade for top goaltender. Personally platooning Conklin is my preference. I look to what Boston has done with Manny Fernandez and Thomas - they got something going. Anyhow if management thinks that the playoffs with Osgood is an option then things really do stink in Denmark.

I personally hope they don't consider him the playoff goalie. Its far better for us "long-term" fans when he comes in to pick up the pieces at the end.... Then we can all sit back and watch the other wet themselves with joy saying "i really did love him all along" or the favorite "I am eating my crow" f*** the crow....

[Datsyerberger 279]

\

They need to get Osgood on a roll, as he, not Conklin, gives the Wings their best chance in the Post Season.

Just to reinforce that:

Osgood career playoff stats with the Wings: SV% 9.20 GAA 2.00

Brodeur with Devils: SV% 9.22 GAA 1.96

Conklin: (It's not pretty)

[Ms_Hockey 0]

I read the first page and the last page and I just thought I'd throw something out there.

I'm not about to question and organization that is clearly dedicated to winning, but I am curious as to why the Wings never spend the money to get a big name goalie.

I mean obviously we are dealing with a cap scenario now but in hockey defense wins championships, so why skimp on it?

I mean sure Ozzy did well last year, he had a couple of clutch shutouts, but most people with common sense will agree that Ozzy is not the kind of goalie who will steal a series for you. Hasek, at the top of his game, was that kind of goalie so I can understand why we gave him one more chance.

The Wings, as far as I know, have always been an organization set up around their defense. The whole mindset is that if you have a stellar defense, you don't NEED a stellar goalie. So they use the money they save from signing a top rate goalie and put it into keeping a top rate defense.

It's worked for years. If we were to magically get enough money left over for a top rate goalie, I'd say go ahead & sign 'em. But that's not really realistic in the NHL today. We've got some of the most elite players on the team in the entire league.. and goalie isn't high on our priority list. And you can see that when our defense isn't pulling together.

[Rivalred 630]

Ozzie needs work and so does the D as they are breaking down too much.

[TheOwl 77]

he whole mindset is that if you have a stellar defense, you don't NEED a stellar goalie.

Our D has been anything but stellar. Even still, a stellar goalie doesn't need to cost 7 million a season. A top 10 goalie in this league can be bought for around 3 million a season. Trade one of our "stellar" D guys and get another goalie. Or get rid of one of the under performing forwards. Either way, look down the leader board in Save%, GAA, you won't see very many of the highest paid goalies their.

[Rivalred 630]

Wait a minute... How much did we pay for your 2 goalies last year who won a stanley cup? Oh wait, our D looked a lot different, that's right.

[Heroes of Hockeytown 694]

The Wings, as far as I know, have always been an organization set up around their defense. The whole mindset is that if you have a stellar defense, you don't NEED a stellar goalie. So they use the money they save from signing a top rate goalie and put it into keeping a top rate defense.

Heh, the Wings mindset before the cap was "take whatever money can buy." Hasek and Joseph pulled in huge salaries along with guys like Lidstrom and Stevie making a killing.

The way it has worked out post-cap seems to be the result of a lot of factors, namely that Lidstrom was still pulling in $10M (cut down to 7.6 due to the rollback) when the lockout ended, so they had to be frugal where they could, signing vets like Hasek or Osgood, or going with "up-and-comers" (if you will) like Legace. It worked out well, and so I think the Wings decided to go with that philosophy moving forward. Now that they have so much committed to skaters (that are defensive stalwarts) like Pavel, Hank, Rafalski and at least for now Lidstrom, it's out of necessity as much as anything else.

[Ms_Hockey 0]

Our D has been anything but stellar. Even still, a stellar goalie doesn't need to cost 7 million a season. A top 10 goalie in this league can be bought for around 3 million a season. Trade one of our "stellar" D guys and get another goalie. Or get rid of one of the under performing forwards. Either way, look down the leader board in Save%, GAA, you won't see very many of the highest paid goalies their.

This season, yeah, our defense hasn't been stellar. But in past seasons - it has been. And I think that's really what the Wings organization banks on.

Your idea of a trade sounds good now - because we're not playing so hot. But last season, thinking about trading any of our d-men would've probably sparked some controversy.

The Wings need to do something - whether it be boost their personal morale or just practice twice as long and twice as hard. They're falling short.

It's still the premise of our team. Top paid D, low paid G. It's not working for us right now, so we need to switch it up.. but I can imagine that's why the Wings keep Ozzie around, even when he's not performing.

[Rivalred 630]

A told ya so is ringing in my ears.

[Ms_Hockey 0]

Heh, the Wings mindset before the cap was "take whatever money can buy." Hasek and Joseph pulled in huge salaries along with guys like Lidstrom and Stevie making a killing.

The way it has worked out post-cap seems to be the result of a lot of factors, namely that Lidstrom was still pulling in $10M (cut down to 7.6 due to the rollback) when the lockout ended, so they had to be frugal where they could, signing vets like Hasek or Osgood, or going with "up-and-comers" (if you will) like Legace. It worked out well, and so I think the Wings decided to go with that philosophy moving forward. Now that they have so much committed to skaters (that are defensive stalwarts) like Pavel, Hank, Rafalski and at least for now Lidstrom, it's out of necessity as much as anything else.

I didn't pay much attention to hockey pre-lockout.. so I don't really know anything about the organization before that.

But what you're saying makes sense. I started paying attention around the time that they decided to use that newfound strategy "moving forward", as you said.

Signing a top 10 goalie would be nice, but we have so many elite players that I'm not too sure how it's possible unless we let one or two of them go.

[Rivalred 630]

The Wings won the Cup twice without a top 10 goalie. They won it with a solid tandem goalie rotation and a stellar D.

If our D turns around that shinny silver thing with a bowl on top is ours.