The Chris Osgood discussion thread

[Outsider 42]

So beat out Jimmy Howard for a start. He obviously hasn't done that yet.

From where? From practice? You want Ozzie to "beat out" Jimmy for a Start from practice?

Well, I'd argue that with Babcock stating that Ozzie has "practiced real well the last little while", that he should have had the Start against the Kings tonight.

Because "real well" is a fair sight better than Howard did against the Ducks on Tuesday night.

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

That should speak volumes on where Osgood is at in Babcocks mind. I fully expected Osgood to play tonight. But he's not. I originally thought that Babcock had a vendetta against him, but the more I think about it, Babcock can't afford to lose games because he has a grudge. He's a professional first and I can't see him hindering the team over a grudge.

Think about it... Piss off Osgood, wreck Jimmy Howard, hobble the team... just because he is mad at him? Surely there is more to it than that.

I honestly never thought people would turn on Babcock over Osgood. I guess I underestimated the love.

Who is turning on Babcock here? I don't find any vendetta, just that his decision to start Howard does not make sense and that it is a mistake. We can do that on a discussion forum, right?

Carman: No the situation didn't hurt, but they split games. 7 games in a row is not an even split by any stretch of the imagination.

Hockey on paper, by Doc Holliday

I've seen Ozzie let him bad goals and I've seen Howard let in bad goals. Mike Babcock and his coaching staff didn't see enough to keep him out of the net and neither did I. Maybe we all need our heads examined? Maybe you can perform the treatment, Doc. Osgood is on the bench because he let in whiffers, that killed momentum and our chances at winning. Multiple times. He has barely been consistent all season and alot of people worry when he's between the pipes. That's probably what Babs is remembering and doesn't want.

Pay attention.

Howard let in two stinkers. And three goals total. That means over the whole season he would have a 3.00 GAA (most likely) if he played that same way. Now do you mean to tell me that in any circumstance that is an acceptable number? That a number like that is "good" or "decent"? And that is giving Howard the benefit of the doubt considering the Ducks are one of the worst teams in the NHL right now. Whether you say they are a "playoff team". It is irrelevant what you consider them because they have shown they cannot win on most nights. That was not a good game by Howard, and considering it is a seventh start in a row, that is not a sufficient performance to earn that seventh start. End of story.

And the question is, do you consider it reasonable for Osgood to play like normal when he has been sitting this long? Especially since many people believed Howard's performances in the past years to be mainly based on the fact he only got one or two games in.

[Outsider 42]

Here ya go, Broken.....quoted just for you, so you can actually read it this time, rather than engaging in a lot of verbal masturbation over something which was never said....

Of course Howard looks like he's battling harder, while Osgood is "sitting in his net". Osgood kows that a questionable goal could probably put him back on the bench for another TWO WEEKS. A goaltender needs to be relaxed in net, to "flow" with the play, to use every piece of equipment like an extension of his body, and for every move to feel instinctual - like something his body "should" be doing. Right now, Howard has the luxury of playing that way. Osgood does not.

That's because Howard knows that even after a crappy Game against Edmonton, or a crappy Game against Dallas, or a crappy Game against Chicago, and now a crappy Game against the Ducks.....he's STILL going to get an opportunity to get right back at it.

Osgood knows that if he doesn't play at "the best he can be", (again Babcock's EXACT words), he's likely to be benched, AGAIN, for another two weeks, before he's thrown out there and expected to be "the best he can be" when he's ice cold.

He's playing tight. Howard is not.

If you don't think that's going to have an effect on how a goalie "looks" when he plays, then you haven't ever watched hockey.

And you know that's a fact.

Kindly point out to me where I stated that Osgood was playing "scared". Because I don't recall having said that, (and I have excellent recall, for the record), nor can I find any record of having said that.

What I did say, (and what you would have read....had you actually read the post), was that Osgood was playing "tight".

Rather significant difference between playing "scared" and playing "tight".

Perhaps a reading comprehension course......community college......

<shrug>

[Broken 16 381]

Here ya go, Broken.....quoted just for you, so you can actually read it this time, rather than engaging in a lot of verbal masturbation over something which was never said....

Kindly point out to me where I stated that Osgood was playing "scared". Because I don't recall having said that, (and I have excellent recall, for the record), nor can I find any record of having said that.

What I did say, (and what you would have read....had you actually read the post), was that Osgood was playing "tight".

Rather significant difference between playing "scared" and playing "tight".

Perhaps a reading comprehension course......community college......

<shrug>

When you are nervous or scared, you play tight. Try again.

[Broken 16 381]

Who is turning on Babcock here? I don't find any vendetta, just that his decision to start Howard does not make sense and that it is a mistake. We can do that on a discussion forum, right?

I really hate to break this to you... but you have no way of truly knowing if it is a mistake. You don't even know if it truly makes sense. Personally, I don't base my thoughts off of the canned responses that every hockey person vomits out every time they are asked a question.

Lets go over what you do know about why Osgood isn't playing:

Nothing

Unless you are Kenny or Bab's secretary, you don't know. Even she probably doesn't know.

[Outsider 42]

When you are nervous or scared, you play tight. Try again.

When you're angry, you play tight. That doesn't mean that you're scared.

When you're tense, you play tight. That doesn't mean that you're scared.

There are any number of scenarios where a player could be playing tight, but not be playing scared.

Ville Leino, not scoring any goals, was playing tight. Was he scared? I'm thinkin' not.

Franzen, when he comes back from rehabbing the knee, might be playing tight for a bit, before he gets his skates under him. That doesn't mean he'll be playing scared.

Try again, Broken. Your feeble attempts at logic are amusing, at least.

[Broken 16 381]

From where? From practice? You want Ozzie to "beat out" Jimmy for a Start from practice?

Well, I'd argue that with Babcock stating that Ozzie has "practiced real well the last little while", that he should have had the Start against the Kings tonight.

Because "real well" is a fair sight better than Howard did against the Ducks on Tuesday night.

I don't care who plays goal. Babcock has made it pretty clear that Jimmy is the guy right now. Why? I don't know. Neither do you. As it should be.

And please stop quoting canned responses. They mean nothing. You know that.

Edited January 8, 2010 by Broken 16

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

I really hate to break this to you... but you have no way of truly knowing if it is a mistake. You don't even know if it truly makes sense. Personally, I don't base my thoughts off of the canned responses that every hockey person vomits out every time they are asked a question.

Lets go over what you do know about why Osgood isn't playing:

Nothing

Unless you are Kenny or Bab's secretary, you don't know. Even she probably doesn't know.

I never said my opinion of Babcock's decision was more than an opinion. I am aware that I am not the all knowing authority that knows everything. However based on what I have seen it seems like it is not good to start Howard AGAIN after his game in Anaheim and keep Osgood on the bench AGAIN despite his very good third period against Chicago (though his first two periods were very bad).

That is only an opinion and why I bring it here in the forum. To discuss it.

[Carman 387]

From where? From practice? You want Ozzie to "beat out" Jimmy for a Start from practice?

Well, I'd argue that with Babcock stating that Ozzie has "practiced real well the last little while", that he should have had the Start against the Kings tonight.

Because "real well" is a fair sight better than Howard did against the Ducks on Tuesday night.

Maybe Howard is practicing "very well"?

[Outsider 42]

Maybe Howard is practicing "very well"?

Well then, that's a definite upgrade over his actual play against Anaheim.

[Broken 16 381]

When you're angry, you play tight. That doesn't mean that you're scared.

When you're tense, you play tight. That doesn't mean that you're scared.

There are any number of scenarios where a player could be playing tight, but not be playing scared.

Ville Leino, not scoring any goals, was playing tight. Was he scared? I'm thinkin' not.

Franzen, when he comes back from rehabbing the knee, might be playing tight for a bit, before he gets his skates under him. That doesn't mean he'll be playing scared.

Try again, Broken. Your feeble attempts at logic are amusing, at least.

Oh ok, we're splitting hairs. Cool.

Angry, scared, hurt... details. Pick any of the three you'd like. If he is angry and it's negatively affecting his game. Its unprofessional. If he is scared, same thing. Unprofessional.

Hurt... this probably doesn't apply, but if he is hurt, thank God he isn't playing.

You mention logic. That's pretty funny since my only logic comes from the fact that I have no idea what is going on but I trust Holland and Babcock (and Ilitch, for that matter) are doing what is best for the team. Unlike you, I don't use canned responses and skewed stats to try and get my point across.

[Broken 16 381]

I never said my opinion of Babcock's decision was more than an opinion. I am aware that I am not the all knowing authority that knows everything. However based on what I have seen it seems like it is not good to start Howard AGAIN after his game in Anaheim and keep Osgood on the bench AGAIN despite his very good third period against Chicago (though his first two periods were very bad).

That is only an opinion and why I bring it here in the forum. To discuss it.

Like I said. I fully expected him to start too. The fact that he isn't has me kind of worried for Osgood.

[Outsider 42]

Oh ok, we're splitting hairs. Cool.

Angry, scared, hurt... details. Pick any of the three you'd like. If he is angry and it's negatively affecting his game. Its unprofessional. If he is scared, same thing. Unprofessional.

Hurt... this probably doesn't apply, but if he is hurt, thank God he isn't playing.

You mention logic. That's pretty funny since my only logic comes from the fact that I have no idea what is going on but I trust Holland and Babcock (and Ilitch, for that matter) are doing what is best for the team. Unlike you, I don't use canned responses and skewed stats to try and get my point across.

No. You, (and many others here), simply revert to the Roman Cechmanek argument. It appears to be totally effective. Almost infallible. (Until it's not). And anyone who argues against it is quite obviously "skewing the stats" to support their argument. (Except the stats aren't skewed....they're "stacked"....and in the other direction). And the reason why they can't be taken seriously is because "the stats don't lie." (Until they do).

[gcom007 1,465]

I may be a guy, but I ******* love Diet Coke.

[Statts 4]

Maybe Osgood is just REALLY good at keeping track of who wins face-offs.

[Broken 16 381]

Maybe Osgood is just REALLY good at keeping track of who wins face-offs.

Lol

[Carman 387]

Maybe Osgood is just REALLY good at keeping track of who wins face-offs.

I think you're on to something... haha

[Broken 16 381]

I may be a guy, but I ******* love Diet Coke.

I'd have to disagree. While Diet Coke might be good in the summer, Diet Wild Cherry Pepsi is a great wintertime drink.

[Outsider 42]

Maybe Osgood is just REALLY good at keeping track of who wins face-offs.

Funny you should say that, because in Babcock's first year here, he commented that Osgood kept the neatest face-off charts he'd ever seen.

No lie.

[gcom007 1,465]

I'd have to disagree. While Diet Coke might be good in the summer, Diet Wild Cherry Pepsi is a great wintertime drink.

Diet Coke has been around far longer and has more experience than Diet Wild Cherry Pepsi, so it's still never a bad bet to go to it at any time of year. They make a great 1-2 tandem though day to day. And if Diet Wild Cherry Pepsi keeps it up, it's bound to have a solid career in my garage.

[Broken 16 381]

Diet Coke has been around far longer and has more experience than Diet Wild Cherry Pepsi, so it's still never a bad bet to go to it at any time of year. They make a great 1-2 tandem though day to day. And if Diet Wild Cherry Pepsi keeps it up, it's bound to have a solid career in my garage.

You right. I should probably mix Diet Coke in once in a while. It just never seems as good in the winter as it does in the summer. But I think I owe it to the Coke people to down a Coke in the winter once in a while. If for no other reason than to remind me how awesome Diet Coke is in the summer.

[Rivalred 630]

Anyone think Osgood will demand a trade soon?

[ben_usmc 253]

so can we shut the f*** up about why howard is starting now?

[Carman 387]

so can we shut the f*** up about why howard is starting now?

But the teams he's beat are all bad, and he can't perform well verse high ranked teams. Oh...

He can't recover from that Anaheim game!! He's a rookie they can't start consecutive games! Oh...

He's over worked from starting 7 games in a row as a 25 year old. Oh...

I didn't see the "travesty" that was giving Howard the King's start over Osgood. He managed to steal of a game. Osgood will get his chance, right now we all should be focusing on seeing our rookie goaltender put up very solid performances fairly consistently behind a very injury riddled team. No reason to bash either goaltender.

[Guest lilja4mvp]

Sure as hell wasn't good or hot. There were two bad goals (Osgood had two bad bad goals against Chicago but his play in the third is overlooked simply because of the fact he let in two soft goals).

Same panic that entices people to think that Howard deserves 7 starts in a row over Osgood simply because they think that Howard may play better. He is getting overworked, and it showed last game.

And switch it up when the hot hand cools off. That was the Anaheim game in a nutshell.

Well when a goalie who lets in two softies gets the next start, after the other goaltender did the same thing but hasn't played since, it isn't simply about how well you do in the games anymore. And based on Bab's comments it isn't about how well you do in practice either. So what is it?

Well the simplist answer isn't always the correct one, and since Howard did not have a good game against Anaheim it would seem like Babcock would want to start Osgood. This isn't about performance if you saw the Anaheim game.

Of course you can shrug it off and call me an Osgood fanboy. I personally hope I'm wrong and Howard leads Detroit to a win tonight. However I believe that Howard is getting worn out when it isn't necessary to.

And once again if you are going to discuss things logically with a poster, bring some of your own. You haven't been too hot with the logic yourself, and have chosen to ignore some of my posts as well. Should I call you a homer and fanatical? Or is it just for those who don't justify every one of Babcock's decisions.

you're no daisy! you're no daisy at all!