You are an idiot.
Too obvious...
I agree.
Posted 03 May 2010 - 01:04 PM
You are an idiot.
Too obvious...
Posted 03 May 2010 - 01:31 PM
Posted 03 May 2010 - 01:38 PM

Posted 03 May 2010 - 01:42 PM
Posted 03 May 2010 - 01:51 PM
Posted 03 May 2010 - 01:55 PM
Posted 03 May 2010 - 06:18 PM
LAUGH OUT LOUD.
It's not how many saves you make. It's when and how you make them. Howard gave up two soft goals in the final 15:20, killing the Wings' momentum. The first let the Sharks tie the game, and gave them much more life. This put the Wings back on their heels as the Sharks increased their attack. Howard gave up another bad goal with only 7:23 remaining, putting the Sharks into a 4-3 lead with little time left in the game.
41 saves doesn't matter if he allows soft, game-changing goals at two pivotal moments of the third period. He could have made 100 saves and it wouldn't matter if he allowed those two goals and it changed the lead and won San Jose the game.
As a goaltender, he should assume the most goal support he's going to get is 2-3 goals. If he allows 2 s***ty goals, he better be perfect the rest of the game. While he played well, he wasn't. Especially considering he was more than once saved by a teammate (VS once even called "Great save Howard" for a shot when Howard was flat on his back and the shot hit a kneeling Z in the logo) so there could have been even more bad goals to rant about.
Bad goals at bad times are about the worst thing a goalie can give up, and Howard has given up more than a few this playoff run. The offense has come through for him a few times to cover that up, but it can't be there all the time. No team scores 4-5 goals every game... unless they're playing Howard the way he has played most of the playoffs.
Edited by SouthernWingsFan, 03 May 2010 - 06:19 PM.
Posted 03 May 2010 - 07:17 PM

Posted 03 May 2010 - 07:19 PM
So hate on but guess what, I feel like I can't miss,
I know they want me to fall, But ain't nothin' bigger than this, So just pass me the ball
No Further Trades Needed
Posted 03 May 2010 - 08:10 PM
Howard obviously doesnt have enough experience to face San Jose which is a more veteran type team. last year i believe ozzy was the best goalie in the playoffs with the best goals against ratio, somewhere around 1.88 or something? i dont remember. the point is howard just isnt ready for this veteran team, we need to put in our veteran goalie. please. everyone knows the last two goals scored by SJ was howards fault.
anyone agree
Posted 03 May 2010 - 09:10 PM
LAUGH OUT LOUD.
I'm going to LAUGH OUT LOUD again at this.
I'd hardly consider giving up a 5-on-3 goal in a goalmouth scramble and a 3-on-1 goal rush immediately after one of your player's stick unfortunately breaks, soft.
I know I'm going to regret asking, but what isn't a soft goal to you then? Or is this all about trying to find any warped reasoning to put Osgood in when Howard's play really isn't the main issue to worry about right now?
Posted 03 May 2010 - 09:35 PM
Posted 03 May 2010 - 09:39 PM
You're nuts.
Here's how those goals were Howard's fault:
The "goalmouth scramble" goal only happened because Howard came 2 light years out of the net. Had he not been five feet out of the crease with two or three Sharks down low, there would have been no danger at all. That was a huge failure on Howard's part and regardless of whether the defense failed to clear the puck, the goalie should have been in proper position and had he been, the puck is frozen and the play stops.
The 3-on-1 was dangerous until the Sharks played it horribly. Heatley went to the bottom of the right circle while the other two skaters went to the slot right near the hash marks, where the Wing defender could cut off a pass to either player. This meant that to take advantage of the opportunity, the puck carrier had to shoot the puck or the 3-on-1 would be gone. Howard, who was at the edge of the crease, failed to either absorb the shot or direct the rebound towards the end boards, instead putting it right on the tape of the left-handed Thornton and giving him a wide open net to shoot on from short range. If that rebound goes where it should have gone, there's no goal on that play. It's like the "amazing" Hanzal second save. Howard stopped the first shot with his glove and couldn't trap it, instead throwing it right to Hanzal for a second chance. He stopped it, but it was his fault Hanzal got a second chance to begin with.
People think "flashy save, wow!" or "3-on-1, no way the goalie could stop that" without actually looking at what happened during the play. Heatley f***ed that 3-on-1 up and the Sharks were lucky Howard has s***ty rebound control.
Posted 03 May 2010 - 09:42 PM
Here's how those goals were Howard's fault:
The "goalmouth scramble" goal only happened because Howard came 2 light years out of the net. Had he not been five feet out of the crease with two or three Sharks down low, there would have been no danger at all. That was a huge failure on Howard's part and regardless of whether the defense failed to clear the puck, the goalie should have been in proper position and had he been, the puck is frozen and the play stops.
The 3-on-1 was dangerous until the Sharks played it horribly. Heatley went to the bottom of the right circle while the other two skaters went to the slot right near the hash marks, where the Wing defender could cut off a pass to either player. This meant that to take advantage of the opportunity, the puck carrier had to shoot the puck or the 3-on-1 would be gone. Howard, who was at the edge of the crease, failed to either absorb the shot or direct the rebound towards the end boards, instead putting it right on the tape of the left-handed Thornton and giving him a wide open net to shoot on from short range. If that rebound goes where it should have gone, there's no goal on that play. It's like the "amazing" Hanzal second save. Howard stopped the first shot with his glove and couldn't trap it, instead throwing it right to Hanzal for a second chance. He stopped it, but it was his fault Hanzal got a second chance to begin with.
People think "flashy save, wow!" or "3-on-1, no way the goalie could stop that" without actually looking at what happened during the play. Heatley f***ed that 3-on-1 up and the Sharks were lucky Howard has s***ty rebound control.
Posted 03 May 2010 - 09:56 PM
Posted 03 May 2010 - 10:29 PM
Here's how those goals were Howard's fault:
The "goalmouth scramble" goal only happened because Howard came 2 light years out of the net. Had he not been five feet out of the crease with two or three Sharks down low, there would have been no danger at all. That was a huge failure on Howard's part and regardless of whether the defense failed to clear the puck, the goalie should have been in proper position and had he been, the puck is frozen and the play stops.
The 3-on-1 was dangerous until the Sharks played it horribly. Heatley went to the bottom of the right circle while the other two skaters went to the slot right near the hash marks, where the Wing defender could cut off a pass to either player. This meant that to take advantage of the opportunity, the puck carrier had to shoot the puck or the 3-on-1 would be gone. Howard, who was at the edge of the crease, failed to either absorb the shot or direct the rebound towards the end boards, instead putting it right on the tape of the left-handed Thornton and giving him a wide open net to shoot on from short range. If that rebound goes where it should have gone, there's no goal on that play.

Posted 03 May 2010 - 10:33 PM
Posted 04 May 2010 - 12:47 AM
Posted 04 May 2010 - 01:08 AM
Posted 04 May 2010 - 01:25 AM
Howard is the goalie of the future, win or lose, let him get playoff experience!
Edited by scottj, 04 May 2010 - 01:27 AM.
| Topic | Forum | Started By | Stats | Last Post Info | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TSN's Onrait & O'Toole, comin' to ya. |
Other Sports | cusimano_brothers |
|
|
|
Not sure where to put this, but 2013 Draft.... |
Prospects Watch | Richdg |
|
|
|
Playing Eaves over Tootoo |
General Discussion | PumpIron |
|
|
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users