Chris Osgood proves Jimmy Howard should be in goal for Red Wings

[Louisville 112]

You're nothing without green man.

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

As much as Osgood deserves appreciation for past accomplishments from the fans, the fans deserve appreciation from Osgood for helping to pay his salary on a team that has been built to win for a long time. Osgood owes it to his boss, his coach, his team and his fans to play with intensity every time he steps onto the ice. Not just in the playoffs. The guy sleepwalks through regular seasons like he is entitled to something. While that may not be entirely true. It sure does look like it. People act like we owe him something. Wtf?

From where I'm sitting, Osgood is the unappreciative one.

I don't think you as a fan have any reason to assume how a player is acting unless you have proof of it.

Howard has said Osgood is a great mentor to him. Babcock has said he has been trying in practice. Osgood has been saying that Jimmy has a good head on his shoulders. From my perspective that is all true, and I don't think I've seen a lackadaisical player on the team since Lang laced up the skates.

Just because someone does better in the playoffs than they do in the regular season doesn't mean they don't really care. Look at Zetterberg for instance. When the playoffs roll around he turns into a freaking dynamo out there.

[Broken 16 381]

I don't think you as a fan have any reason to assume how a player is acting unless you have proof of it.

I come to my own conclusions based on what I see and hear. Weather or not you agree is irrelevant.

Howard has said Osgood is a great mentor to him. Babcock has said he has been trying in practice. Osgood has been saying that Jimmy has a good head on his shoulders. From my perspective that is all true, and I don't think I've seen a lackadaisical player on the team since Lang laced up the skates.

Doesn't mean I don't think Osgood looks like s*** every time he plays. Again... your agreement is irrelevant.

Just because someone does better in the playoffs than they do in the regular season doesn't mean they don't really care. Look at Zetterberg for instance. When the playoffs roll around he turns into a freaking dynamo out there.

Zetterberg hasn't whined to the press. And that's just one tiny fragment of an utterly failed comparison. Try again.

Edited January 29, 2010 by Broken 16

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

I come to my own conclusions based on what I see and hear. Weather or not you agree is irrelevant.

The facts are relevant and don't point to your conclusions. I'm also not interested in the weather, thank you.

Doesn't mean I don't think Osgood looks like s*** every time he plays. Again... your agreement is irrelevant.

Not for a lack of trying. Once again, the facts don't point to that.

Zetterberg hasn't whined to the press. And that's just one tiny fragment of an utterly failed comparison. Try again.

Pretty sure the argument of "doesn't try in the regular season but turns it on in the postseason" came around BEFORE he "whined" to the press. And I use that term loosely.

Edited January 29, 2010 by Doc Holliday

[Broken 16 381]

Doc... I'd rather watch paint dry. Amusing you with pointless arguments is not a high priority (your petty attacks on typos pretty much sum up what you are about). I've already stated in my previous post that your opinion means nothing to me. Why waste your time?

Babcock has already been quoted: "If we need a win tomorrow... Howard is in net"

Good enough for me.

Edited January 29, 2010 by Broken 16

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

Doc... I'd rather watch paint dry. Amusing you with pointless arguments is not a high priority. I've already stated in my previous post that your opinion means nothing to me. Why waste your time?

Babcock has already been quoted: "If we need a win tomorrow... Howard is in net"

Good enough for me.

Here's a tip: Don't respond to me.

I come here for discussion with other posters. If you don't want any then don't continue the discussion.

In fact, if you want to act like my opinion doesn't matter (despite the fact you have responded to me TWICE) then just put me on ignore. There are plenty of people here who are able to put on a civil discourse without acting like a child.

Also, if you can't take a little jab for a spelling error (it was barely an attack) then you obviously have some issues.

Edited January 29, 2010 by Doc Holliday

[Broken 16 381]

Here's a tip: Don't respond to me.

I come here for discussion with other posters. If you don't want any then don't continue the discussion.

In fact, if you want to act like my opinion doesn't matter (despite the fact you have responded to me TWICE) then just put me on ignore. There are plenty of people here who are able to put on a civil discourse without acting like a child.

Also, if you can't take a little jab for a spelling error (it was barely an attack) then you obviously have some issues.

Are you kidding? Block you? And miss watching you stumble around the forum looking for an argument like a dog sniffing butts? It would be like turning off a bad episode of Jerry Springer. You know you shouldn't be watching, but you just... can't... help... it...

Edited January 29, 2010 by Broken 16

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

Are you kidding? Block you? And miss watching you stumble around the forum looking for an argument like a dog sniffing butts? It would be like turning off a bad episode of Jerry Springer. You know you shouldn't be watching, but you just... can't... help... it...

I'm sorry, I thought discussion forums were for discussions?

I guess next time I read a forum and have a disagreement, I'll be sure to mind my business, because LGW is not for any kind of discussion about different opinions on the sport of hockey and the Detroit Red Wings.

Silly me.

[Outsider 42]

Babcock has already been quoted: "If we need a win tomorrow... Howard is in net"

Good enough for me.

That's taken quite out of context, even for you, Broken.

[Drake_Marcus 890]

Both of them are s***ty.....

I bet you have trouble dressing yourself in the morning.

[Broken 16 381]

That's taken quite out of context, even for you, Broken.

How so?

(I can't resist)

Edited January 29, 2010 by Broken 16

[gcom007 1,465]

I didn't read the whole thread, but the same Babcock that's had no problem ripping into Osgood this season said the following about last night:

"The two power-play goals, he didn't have a chance on those," Babcock said. "Part of it is helping your goaltender out. When your team plays the way it did tonight, I don't think you can evaluate the goaltender. That would be totally unfair."

So, ummm, huh???

[Broken 16 381]

I didn't read the whole thread, but the same Babcock that's had no problem ripping into Osgood this season said the following about last night:

"The two power-play goals, he didn't have a chance on those," Babcock said. "Part of it is helping your goaltender out. When your team plays the way it did tonight, I don't think you can evaluate the goaltender. That would be totally unfair."

So, ummm, huh???

Nobody ever accused Babcock of being a liar. Do you have a point? Just curious.

Edited January 29, 2010 by Broken 16

[gcom007 1,465]

Nobody ever accused Babcock of being a liar. Do you have a point? Just curious.

I just find it odd that the coach that has had no problem stringing up Osgood is defending him in the same game many here are using to suggest that he's finished.

[Broken 16 381]

I just find it odd that the coach that has had no problem stringing up Osgood is defending him in the same game many here are using to suggest that he's finished.

People have been suggesting that Osgood was finished long before the Minnesota game. That game was just another straw.

[RockyMountainWingGal 108]

If someone writes crap likes this, it makes it quite hard for me to take him seriously.

I don't want excuses, I want results ???? What is this ? Full Metal Jacket ??

Dumb F.

Are you employed? Because I am, and I know my employer expects "results" and not "excuses". That's just the reality of life dude, and Ozzy makes a hell alot more money than me (or most people here) to put up results.... Just the facts m'am

[Outsider 42]

How so?

(I can't resist)

What Babcock said was:

...."but, if you're Ozzie, you haven't won in awhile".....

What was it Babcock said after the Game last night? Something about "Winning is like losing. It's a habit. When you get in the habit of losing...."

Now.....after he'd stated that Osgood hadn't won in "awhile", and then lauded him for being such a good mentor, and how he has no problem talking to Ozzie about "the situation, about what's going on" he states.....

".....but right now, Howard's had the opportunity to win more than Ozzie has, so it's a real simple thing for the coach - We need to win tomorrow, Howard's in net."

Again, as you do with most things, you've taken it out of context.

Somehow, I'm not surprised. Nothing you say really contains anything of substance. You just like to stir the pot.

It's like you said:

You can't resist.

[gcom007 1,465]

Somehow, I'm not surprised. Nothing you say really contains anything of substance. You just like to stir the pot.

It's like you said:

You can't resist.

Maybe true, but it can be pretty entertaining at times...

[Stiffy 0]

If someone writes crap likes this, it makes it quite hard for me to take him seriously.

I don't want excuses, I want results ???? What is this ? Full Metal Jacket ??

Dumb F.

You want the truth interminded? You can't HANDLE the truth!

P.S. Full Metal Jacket was a Kubrick film and as such was far more cerebral than most war movies that include the worn cliches you bring to light.

[Broken 16 381]

What Babcock said was:

...."but, if you're Ozzie, you haven't won in awhile".....

What was it Babcock said after the Game last night? Something about "Winning is like losing. It's a habit. When you get in the habit of losing...."

Now.....after he'd stated that Osgood hadn't won in "awhile", and then lauded him for being such a good mentor, and how he has no problem talking to Ozzie about "the situation, about what's going on" he states.....

".....but right now, Howard's had the opportunity to win more than Ozzie has, so it's a real simple thing for the coach - We need to win tomorrow, Howard's in net."

Again, as you do with most things, you've taken it out of context.

Somehow, I'm not surprised. Nothing you say really contains anything of substance. You just like to stir the pot.

It's like you said:

You can't resist.

I'm still not clear on how any of this has any bearing on my opinion that Osgood looks bad and weak in net. I can't help it if my opinion of Osgood doesn't count as substance in your opinion. And I can't help it that Babcock also happens to think that Howard gives the team the best chance to win. I agree with his quote... regardless of how you intend to spin it.

Edited January 29, 2010 by Broken 16

[Pucks 66]

Honestly?

Have people stopped watching the past few games?

Neither goaltender is winning, so why exactly is it so imperative that we focus on which goaltender should play?

Because he give us a better chance of winning the game. Even if we don't get the win. Understand?

Edited January 29, 2010 by Pucks

[interminded 1]

You want the truth interminded? You can't HANDLE the truth!

P.S. Full Metal Jacket was a Kubrick film and as such was far more cerebral than most war movies that include the worn cliches you bring to light.

Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: How tall are you, private?

Private Cowboy: Sir, five-foot-nine, sir.

Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Five-foot-nine, I didn't know they stacked s*** that high.

Yes, far more cerebral...

p.s. Who said anything about truth ? Truth is so 2005 ...

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

Because he give us a better chance of winning the game. Even if we don't get the win. Understand?

I thought it was about results?

The defense has s*** the bed the last few games and has lost almost all of those games, so wouldn't it make sense that the defensive breakdowns are what is losing the game and not the goaltending?

I have no problem with Howard starting the next few but you put so much emphasis on the goaltending as if it is what is winning and losing the games when that isn't the truth. The team needs to play better defensively before either Howard or Osgood get some wins together. So "better chance" or not it isn't going to show results depending on which goaltender is out there, unless Howard brings another LA game to the table (which is why I said he should start more because he is more likely to pull of that game considering how the season has played out).

[edicius 3,269]

Exactly. Some people here make it seem like Howard was racking up all kinds of wins lately and somehow the season is lost by giving Ozzie a couple of starts.

Goaltending isn't the issue. The Red Wings stink right now. Every single one of them except Lidstrom.

Hell, most people seem to forget that Howard gave up the same amount of goals in his last start as Osgood did.

[WMUsiv1 4]

I have little doubt that Ozzie COULD get back into the zone in the right circumstances (lots of cusion in the standings, plenty of time til the playoffs) but now is crunch time, and the Wings have neither of those. I love Ozzie but he looked pretty slow and unmotivated in that Minnesota game (though nobody can really blame him for the loss, the whole team sucked). Keep Jimmy in, he's done all he can to prove himself. I still say I have some confidence in Ozzie in the playoffs if Jimmy gets too nervous.

This season doesnt change the fact that Ozzie is a hall of famer.