Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 15 votes

Ozzy for game 4?


  • Please log in to reply
162 replies to this topic

#41 gcom007

gcom007

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,215 posts
  • Location:Nashville, TN

Posted 18 April 2010 - 05:49 PM

To watch Osgood do just as bad? This team has one option in goal and his name is Jimmy Howard. It's glaringly obvious and it doesn't matter who you have allegiances to.

Two Cups while playing, one while watching.


You know that I'm not any sort of a Howard hater. But you know, this is Phoenix and he's looked rough. Can you imagine if we were playing Chicago? Like I said, Osgood very well may be too rusty to pull it off again, but if Howard can't get it together in game 4, you might as well give Osgood a chance. It's not as if he's been injured. He's been practicing. He's not wholly cold. I think in the context of his long career, but especially the last couple years, that Osgood has earned a chance if Howard continues to struggle.

And just as I said earlier, you still learn from the bench. Osgood learned plenty watching Vernon win that first Cup. Sure, he played for only two rings, but that doesn't minimize being a part of winning that 3rd ring. That's why I have no problem with Howard watching. He's still going to learn, and to me, you can "earn your ring" as well as the next guy by watching and learning from the bench.

-Elliot


#42 mb94

mb94

    Draftee

  • Member
  • 13 posts

Posted 18 April 2010 - 05:52 PM

I agree. Osgood is too rusty to turn it around in time to save the series. Thanks, Babcock!



I absolutely agree with what you're saying. He hasn't had any match training, so he won't be an option.

#43 Hockeytown_Ryan

Hockeytown_Ryan

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,806 posts
  • Location:Saint Clair Shores, MI

Posted 18 April 2010 - 05:55 PM

This is why people calling for Ozzy to start more than 1 game in the last few months weren't just blind Ozzy homers. It'd be nice to have the OPTION to go to him, but we really don't have that.

Howard should start game 4 anyway. If he sucks and we lose, I'd go to Ozzy for game 5. Not that it would really matter after that.


NO F'n Way.... Let Howard lose a series while he is on the ice.. dont give Osgood a start in a hostile game 5 .. thats a DICK MOVE.... Howard is making his bed let him lay in it. No one came to Osgood's side when we stuck with him in the past series's that he lost in.... Let Howrad feel the real pressure of big league playoffs... If you want him to grow...Let him cry a little.

#44 b.shanafan14

b.shanafan14

    One good Swede deserves another!

  • Silver Booster
  • 2,872 posts
  • Location:Upper Peninsula, Michigan

Posted 18 April 2010 - 05:57 PM

Howard: 3GP 1-2 3.67GAA 0.888Sv%

And as gcom007 mentioned, this is against a Coyote team that was 24th in the league in goals for, not the Washington Capitals.

Osgood is too rusty at this point to be better fast enough to turn the series around, but Howard is not going to get the job done, and now the pressure is going to be even higher. So really, what are the Wings options?

NO F'n Way.... Let Howard lose a series while he is on the ice.. dont give Osgood a start in a hostile game 5 .. thats a DICK MOVE.... Howard is making his bed let him lay in it. No one came to Osgood's side when we stuck with him in the past series's that he lost in.... Let Howrad feel the real pressure of big league playoffs... If you want him to grow...Let him cry a little.

:clap: Exactly. If Howard plays and loses Game 4, he sticks around to lose Game 5.

#45 gcom007

gcom007

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,215 posts
  • Location:Nashville, TN

Posted 18 April 2010 - 05:57 PM

People are forgetting that Osgood didn't play remotely as bad in the regular season this year as he did last year, and that's even considering the fact that he never had a chance to get going in the second half. I don't think Osgood's lost as much as some think, and I'm sorry, but there's just no way i can utterly write him off in the post-season at this point. I'm not saying that there aren't concerns due to rust, but there's also some hopes to that as of now, have a lot more experience to back them up than my hopes for Howard.

-Elliot


#46 Hossa4Life

Hossa4Life

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,139 posts
  • Location:HockeyTown Michigan

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:00 PM

I agree. Osgood is too rusty to turn it around in time to save the series. Thanks, Babcock!



yea thanks babcock for playing the better performing goalie at the time so that we could make the playoffs even through all of our injuries. what bad coaching.

Edited by Hossa4Life, 18 April 2010 - 06:02 PM.

But I must be off, I have some jerking off to do. Oh btw I like to consider myself extremely attractive and am proud of myself for being your intellectual superior as I am going to UofM next year, and I am a better hockey player than Crosby.

Posted Image


#47 Hockeytown Red Wings

Hockeytown Red Wings

    Buckeye & Red Wing fanatic

  • Silver Booster
  • 4,500 posts
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:02 PM

Absolutely not. Howard's 4th goal was awful, but he's the beast that got us here and we gotta ride him. Now if he starts off Game 4 looking shaky, I might change my tune quickly.

"During Robert Lang’s time in Detroit, he caused me anguish. Other times he brought me and my family great joy. Robert Lang occasionally coasts, and spends time searching for the best pane of glass to best view the reflection of his flowing mullet. Other times he is a strong-armed force with the puck. I never knew what to expect from Robert Lang. He is The Enigma. " - A2Y

#48 GoWings1905

GoWings1905

    Legend

  • Gold Booster
  • 5,631 posts

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:03 PM

I honestly wouldn't mind it, but Babcock made it so going to Ozzie at this point is no longer even an option. It would be a huge risk going to a goalie who has made two starts in 2010, even one with the success Ozzie has put up the past two playoff runs.

I had a bad feeling this would happen in the playoffs. Jimmy just hasn't been very good and today he was truly awful. The team didn't play that strong in front of him but it didn't matter because he didn't even give them a chance to win. The second and fourth goals were momentum killers. He has to control the rebound on Wolski's goal and the fourth was downright pathetic.

I'm not even that mad at Jimmy... it's a tough position to be in and he just hasn't lived up to the expectations he had coming off a super regular season. I'm extremely pissed at Babcock for completely mishandling the goaltender situation. He put the Red Wings in the scenario of sink or swim with Jimmy and now the team is in a tough position with no real alternative because of Babcock's decision. You HAVE to get Ozzie more games in case this did happen - there were a bunch of us saying that numerous times late in the year.

Jimmy Howard has to be better or this series isn't coming back to Detroit. Mike Babcock made it this way.

Edited by GoWings1905, 18 April 2010 - 06:08 PM.

 
 
"To whom much is given, much is expected."
 
 

 

 

 

 


#49 b.shanafan14

b.shanafan14

    One good Swede deserves another!

  • Silver Booster
  • 2,872 posts
  • Location:Upper Peninsula, Michigan

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:07 PM

yea thanks babcock for playing the better performing goalie at the time so that we could make the playoffs even through all of our injuries. what bad coaching.

That proceeding under the assumption that Osgood would have been as bad playing every third game as he is playing on the second of a back-to-back after not seeing game action for over a month. Howard got us here and should have started the playoffs, no one will argue that. But Babcock did a piss-poor job of managing his goaltenders because he has a huge tendency to play favorites. People forget, that before Osgood got the flu and didn't see game action for months at a time, he wasn't having a horrible season.

#50 Hossa4Life

Hossa4Life

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,139 posts
  • Location:HockeyTown Michigan

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:13 PM

That proceeding under the assumption that Osgood would have been as bad playing every third game as he is playing on the second of a back-to-back after not seeing game action for over a month. Howard got us here and should have started the playoffs, no one will argue that. But Babcock did a piss-poor job of managing his goaltenders because he has a huge tendency to play favorites. People forget, that before Osgood got the flu and didn't see game action for months at a time, he wasn't having a horrible season.


Osgood was NOT playing well, so he played howard. That is not poor goalie managment. Dont just have a blind love for osgood because he is a your favorite and give me negative feedback because you dont agree with me. Howard got us to the playoffs and he is playing well enough to keep his starting job. Until he gets a loss when our d is playing up to there full potential you leave him in. Neither of the losses where a result of howard playing bad.

But I must be off, I have some jerking off to do. Oh btw I like to consider myself extremely attractive and am proud of myself for being your intellectual superior as I am going to UofM next year, and I am a better hockey player than Crosby.

Posted Image


#51 b.shanafan14

b.shanafan14

    One good Swede deserves another!

  • Silver Booster
  • 2,872 posts
  • Location:Upper Peninsula, Michigan

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:18 PM

Osgood was NOT playing well, so he played howard. That is not poor goalie managment. Dont just have a blind love for osgood because he is a your favorite and give me negative feedback because you dont agree with me. Howard got us to the playoffs and he is playing well enough to keep his starting job. Until he gets a loss when our d is playing up to there full potential you leave him in. Neither of the losses where a result of howard playing bad.

Negative feedback?? Calm down, you seem to be the one that is getting his panties in a twist when people disagree. And I'm a Wings fan before an Osgood fan, and I'm not alone in thinking two goaltenders are better than one with no experience. The Wings haven't played up to snuff, but as we saw with Hasek before he got yanked in 2008 and Legace in 2006, its really hard to get a foothold when you finally get some momentum and its taken away in 30-60 seconds.

#52 Hossa4Life

Hossa4Life

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,139 posts
  • Location:HockeyTown Michigan

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:21 PM

Negative feedback?? Calm down, you seem to be the one that is getting his panties in a twist when people disagree. And I'm a Wings fan before an Osgood fan, and I'm not alone in thinking two goaltenders are better than one with no experience. The Wings haven't played up to snuff, but as we saw with Hasek before he got yanked in 2008 and Legace in 2006, its really hard to get a foothold when you finally get some momentum and its taken away in 30-60 seconds.



what do you mean calm down your acting like i was acting irrational. I was just stating argue with me if you disagree but im only stating my opinion not anything out of hand. It seems to me you care more about osgood getting starts then the wings winning. That is all im saying.

But I must be off, I have some jerking off to do. Oh btw I like to consider myself extremely attractive and am proud of myself for being your intellectual superior as I am going to UofM next year, and I am a better hockey player than Crosby.

Posted Image


#53 gcom007

gcom007

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,215 posts
  • Location:Nashville, TN

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:29 PM

Osgood was NOT playing well, so he played howard. That is not poor goalie managment. Dont just have a blind love for osgood because he is a your favorite and give me negative feedback because you dont agree with me. Howard got us to the playoffs and he is playing well enough to keep his starting job. Until he gets a loss when our d is playing up to there full potential you leave him in. Neither of the losses where a result of howard playing bad.


You really should go back and review the first half of the season. In October, Osgood was getting no help but still many were saying he was the only reason we weren't getting blown out in many games. It wasn't so much that Osgood was bad so much as Howard got hot as hell for awhile and Babcock rode him. Then Osgood got pissed and ran his mouth (while his point, now more than ever, was probably valid, it was still a dumb move) and Babcock benches him even longer. Again, before Howard got going after the Toronto game in which Osgood was sick (leading to his being out a week and Howard getting a chance) and the team was horrible, Osgood had a shutout and 3 outstanding games (.950+ sv.% I believe).

Osgood getting benched had to do with Howard playing like a madman and then Osgood running his mouth. He absolutely was not playing nearly as bad as he did in the 2008/09 regular season leading up to it. I was one of the one's saying we needed to give Osgood more of a chance, and i still stand by that, but I'm also not ready to count Osgood out if we need him.

To me, it's really this simple: if Osgood's "bad" in the regular season was enough to bench him, Howard's "bad" thus far in the playoffs is just about enough to bench him.

I say start Howard in game 4 like most, and I'll certainly be cheering for him, but if he lets in 3 goals that aren't absolutely rock solid goals, in my mind, it's time to go to Osgood. The regular season is a different beast than the playoffs, and thus far, Howard has done nothing to prove that he's ready for it.

Again, I'm not saying he's done, and I don't think he's pulling a Manny Legace. I think he's a rookie learning a s***ty lesson. Maybe he'll get it together in game 4, but if not, it's time for him to start learning by watching again.

-Elliot


#54 DSM

DSM

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 675 posts

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:31 PM

I had a feeling this would happen. However, I won't make a judgement against Howard until after game 4. If anybody sits for game 4 it should be Draper and Bertuzzi.

#55 gcom007

gcom007

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,215 posts
  • Location:Nashville, TN

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:34 PM

Vs's intemission crew seems to think it may be time for Osgood for what (little) it's worth...

-Elliot


#56 Hossa4Life

Hossa4Life

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,139 posts
  • Location:HockeyTown Michigan

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:34 PM

ok no point in arguing.

Better get my rep up.

WE SHOULD START OSGOOD.

That should do it.

But I must be off, I have some jerking off to do. Oh btw I like to consider myself extremely attractive and am proud of myself for being your intellectual superior as I am going to UofM next year, and I am a better hockey player than Crosby.

Posted Image


#57 Hockeytown_Ryan

Hockeytown_Ryan

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,806 posts
  • Location:Saint Clair Shores, MI

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:34 PM

You really should go back and review the first half of the season. In October, Osgood was getting no help but still many were saying he was the only reason we weren't getting blown out in many games. It wasn't so much that Osgood was bad so much as Howard got hot as hell for awhile and Babcock rode him. Then Osgood got pissed and ran his mouth (while his point, now more than ever, was probably valid, it was still a dumb move) and Babcock benches him even longer. Again, before Howard got going after the Toronto game in which Osgood was sick (leading to his being out a week and Howard getting a chance) and the team was horrible, Osgood had a shutout and 3 outstanding games (.950+ sv.% I believe).

Osgood getting benched had to do with Howard playing like a madman and then Osgood running his mouth. He absolutely was not playing nearly as bad as he did in the 2008/09 regular season leading up to it. I was one of the one's saying we needed to give Osgood more of a chance, and i still stand by that, but I'm also not ready to count Osgood out if we need him.

To me, it's really this simple: if Osgood's "bad" in the regular season was enough to bench him, Howard's "bad" thus far in the playoffs is just about enough to bench him.

I say start Howard in game 4 like most, and I'll certainly be cheering for him, but if he lets in 3 goals that aren't absolutely rock solid goals, in my mind, it's time to go to Osgood. The regular season is a different beast than the playoffs, and thus far, Howard has done nothing to prove that he's ready for it.

Again, I'm not saying he's done, and I don't think he's pulling a Manny Legace. I think he's a rookie learning a s***ty lesson. Maybe he'll get it together in game 4, but if not, it's time for him to start learning by watching again.


And I say that since it was argued all freaking season long that Howard is earning his starts then he is earning his losses too and should ride it out like a man... Let him LOSE!!!!! Osgood has been left on the bench so don't go to him when you know what you got right?? Howard has made his bed let him sleep in it kept hearing "It's his job, Its his job, he earned it..." OK lets see hoe badly he wants to play the next game and the one after that.....
  • DSM likes this

#58 b.shanafan14

b.shanafan14

    One good Swede deserves another!

  • Silver Booster
  • 2,872 posts
  • Location:Upper Peninsula, Michigan

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:39 PM

ok no point in arguing.

Better get my rep up.

WE SHOULD START OSGOOD.

That should do it.

Internet tantrum much? If you have even listened to the discussion, the consensus is NOT to start Osgood.

#59 Hossa4Life

Hossa4Life

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,139 posts
  • Location:HockeyTown Michigan

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:44 PM

Internet tantrum much? If you have even listened to the discussion, the consensus is NOT to start Osgood.


not a tantrum relizing im dealing with all ozzy slappies.

Let me give you a summury of your points. Osgood would be jesus christ himself but babcock didnt play him so now even though osgood is the better goalie howard should start so osgood cant lose (because he will if the team plays like this) and prove you wrong.

Conclusion osgood slappy

But I must be off, I have some jerking off to do. Oh btw I like to consider myself extremely attractive and am proud of myself for being your intellectual superior as I am going to UofM next year, and I am a better hockey player than Crosby.

Posted Image


#60 gcom007

gcom007

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,215 posts
  • Location:Nashville, TN

Posted 18 April 2010 - 06:45 PM

And I say that since it was argued all freaking season long that Howard is earning his starts then he is earning his losses too and should ride it out like a man... Let him LOSE!!!!! Osgood has been left on the bench so don't go to him when you know what you got right?? Howard has made his bed let him sleep in it kept hearing "It's his job, Its his job, he earned it..." OK lets see hoe badly he wants to play the next game and the one after that.....


It's a team game to me. That's what bugs me about these goalie debates is that despite the uniqueness of the position requiring so much goalie-centric thought, it's still a team game at the end of the day. That's why I didn't like seeing Osgood benched to collect dust and rust and it's why I think it's stupid to say that Howard needs to be the guy to lose. It makes no sense to me. If Howard's not getting it done, give Osgood a chance. Maybe he'll be too rusty to help or maybe he'll pull off his third straight brilliant playoff run.

I don't want to lose, period.

I don't care who's in net so long as we win, but if we're losing and Howard's not playing any better and we've got the bestf****** playoff goalie of the last two years who's a proven Cup winner sitting on the bench, I say you've got to give him a chance. Chris Osgood is far from a no-name backup goalie. He's going to be a 400 game winner before he's done. If Howard can't do it, you've got to give Osgood a chance.

-Elliot






Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users