Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Percentage of starts next year for Howard and Osgood


  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

#41 HankthaTank

HankthaTank

    3rd Line Center

  • Silver Booster
  • 4,815 posts
  • Location:Warren, MI

Posted 18 May 2010 - 06:45 PM

Name a better goaltender than Osgood who is either a UFA willing to sign for less than $2m, or a currently signed goalie who makes less than $2m and is available for less than a minimum of one of Filppula, Franzen, or Kronwall. Not there.



WHICH MOST LIKELY WON'T HAPPEN.....

Those were probably the key words in regards to finding a better backup.
TO WHOM MUCH IS GIVEN, MUCH IS EXPECTED.

#42 eva unit zero

eva unit zero

    Save the Princess...Save the World

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,734 posts

Posted 18 May 2010 - 11:05 PM

WHICH MOST LIKELY WON'T HAPPEN.....

Those were probably the key words in regards to finding a better backup.


The way you said it implied it could be done. There are no goaltenders who make anywhere near Osgood's salary or less who can match his playing ability who wouldn't cost the Wings significant assets. Very few goalies, such as Rask, even can match the salary and match or beat the playing level, without considering the assets to actually acquire the goaltender.

This is why I basically posed the question to you of who you seriously thought would make a better backup for Howard than Osgood. Remember also that the Wings are on the hook anyway for Osgood's salary cap hit if he is forced into retirement.

The obvious idea isn't to find a different backup, it's to go with the guy they have and hope he can regain his form. Unless of course you're an Ozzie hater, and think he should be drawn and quartered for only winning the Wings TWO Cups instead of five or six like Hasek would have.

"I've never seen a warlock do that without his magic."
"I once devoured a monk's soul. It tasted like chocolate."

#43 micah

micah

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,345 posts

Posted 19 May 2010 - 08:47 AM

Howard 50, Osgood zero.

Unless I'm wrong about Osgood. I suspect that Chris is more than a littel miffed about the way this year went and is not all that happy to be playing for Babs. If that's the case, I want him gone. Not because I don't like him or don't think he's still got it - I do like him and I do think he still has the tools to be a great NHL Goalie - but I don't think he'll return to form here and I don't think any ammount of "sorry for the way last year went, we'lltry to work you in more next year, I promise's" from Holland and Babcock will make the stewing that he's likely doing go away. Unless Babs says some very public things commiting to Osgood getting a real shot at being the man next year, I don't expect Osgood to be happy here. If he isn't happy hear, I don't expect him to play to his potential. If he can't play to his potential here, I hope he can go somewhere where he'll get a chance to show the world what he's got left, good or bad.
"It was pretty interesting," said Detroit coach Mike Babcock. "We had May in exhibition for a couple of games and no one gets hacked or whacked. When we don't have him, we get run. We don't have a team that twists off helmets at stoppages. You get tired of seeing it all the time. It's just nice when you get someone to look after that stuff."

#44 Pucks

Pucks

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 680 posts

Posted 19 May 2010 - 10:51 AM

Name a better goaltender than Osgood who is either a UFA willing to sign for less than $2m, or a currently signed goalie who makes less than $2m and is available for less than a minimum of one of Filppula, Franzen, or Kronwall. Not there.


What's the point of having a cheap salary if you suck so bad the coach won't put you in. Hell I'd take any warm body at his position right now if they could come in play 25 games and not suck. I could post a large list of players that meet your requirements, but it would be pointless. All Osgood slappy's see is what's behind them. Thankfully this is the last season we have to have this discussion.

Edited by Pucks, 19 May 2010 - 10:52 AM.


Welcome to the playoffs....where the games get better and the officiating gets worse.


#45 eva unit zero

eva unit zero

    Save the Princess...Save the World

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,734 posts

Posted 19 May 2010 - 10:00 PM

What's the point of having a cheap salary if you suck so bad the coach won't put you in. Hell I'd take any warm body at his position right now if they could come in play 25 games and not suck. I could post a large list of players that meet your requirements, but it would be pointless. All Osgood slappy's see is what's behind them. Thankfully this is the last season we have to have this discussion.


So your opinion is one of:

1) Howard starts all 82 games.

2) The Wings trade valuable assets for a goaltender who is better than Osgood, possibly including Ozzie in the deal or possibly still paying Ozzie's salary. Likely you'll be looking at a loss of a solid young forward and/or defenseman such as Filppula or Kronwall to acquire the new goalie. Really want to make that deal?

3) The Wings use any of the other goalies they have signed instead of Osgood.

Unless, of course, you think Osgood could play 25 games and the overall outcome of those games would be better than the results of any of the three scenarios you implied that I listed, those being scenario 1) Howard's fatigue, scenario2) reduced team capability, or scenario 3) untested young goaltender.

"I've never seen a warlock do that without his magic."
"I once devoured a monk's soul. It tasted like chocolate."

#46 Pucks

Pucks

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 680 posts

Posted 20 May 2010 - 11:04 AM

So your opinion is one of:

1) Howard starts all 82 games.

2) The Wings trade valuable assets for a goaltender who is better than Osgood, possibly including Ozzie in the deal or possibly still paying Ozzie's salary. Likely you'll be looking at a loss of a solid young forward and/or defenseman such as Filppula or Kronwall to acquire the new goalie. Really want to make that deal?

3) The Wings use any of the other goalies they have signed instead of Osgood.

Unless, of course, you think Osgood could play 25 games and the overall outcome of those games would be better than the results of any of the three scenarios you implied that I listed, those being scenario 1) Howard's fatigue, scenario2) reduced team capability, or scenario 3) untested young goaltender.


1. I already gave my opinion in the thread I said 10-15 games for Osgood. Unless we have a time machine.

2. Why the hell would we trade for goaltender? We only need a backup that can keep Jimmy fresh. Pick a UFA and be done. Obviously they'd have to trade, waive Osgood.


Welcome to the playoffs....where the games get better and the officiating gets worse.


#47 eva unit zero

eva unit zero

    Save the Princess...Save the World

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,734 posts

Posted 20 May 2010 - 11:21 AM

1. I already gave my opinion in the thread I said 10-15 games for Osgood. Unless we have a time machine.

2. Why the hell would we trade for goaltender? We only need a backup that can keep Jimmy fresh. Pick a UFA and be done. Obviously they'd have to trade, waive Osgood.


Ok, let's look at this then, going from two different directions.

1) Sign a UFA goaltender who would sign for $1.5m or less. You've now almost certainly signed a goalie worse than Chris Osgood.

2) Sign the best goalie you can who is willing to backup Howard, regardless of price. You're probably spending around $3m.

3) Sign the best goalie on the market, and make Howard backup if necessary. Now you're putting out something like $6-7m.

"I've never seen a warlock do that without his magic."
"I once devoured a monk's soul. It tasted like chocolate."

#48 Pucks

Pucks

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 680 posts

Posted 20 May 2010 - 12:05 PM

[font="Book Antiqua"]
Ok, let's look at this then, going from two different directions.

1) Sign a UFA goaltender who would sign for $1.5m or less. You've now almost certainly signed a goalie worse than Chris Osgood.

I don't believe that would be possible


No point in discussion it further as you believe Osgood is a good goaltender right now and I DO NOT. A sub .900% goalie is not a good value at 1.5 sorry. From my point of view he could be easily replaced for 1.5 and you'd even get a much better performance for the money.

Agree to disagree I suppose. No more of this nonsense after next season thankfully.


Welcome to the playoffs....where the games get better and the officiating gets worse.


#49 HankthaTank

HankthaTank

    3rd Line Center

  • Silver Booster
  • 4,815 posts
  • Location:Warren, MI

Posted 20 May 2010 - 02:00 PM

Howard more

Osgood much less

Case closed.
TO WHOM MUCH IS GIVEN, MUCH IS EXPECTED.





Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users