Kukla's Korner

Kukla's Korner Hockey

Enough Of Osgood

from Rob Otto of Mlive,

At some point, no matter what is happening in front of him, a goalie needs to make an unbelievable save to keep his team in the game. It happens every night in the National Hockey League.

If the only way Chris Osgood can win games is if his team plays perfectly in front of him, then he should not be on the ice.

If I had told you going into the game that Detroit’s defense would hold the Stars to just 15 total shots, I think you would have been very happy about that. Not with good old Ozzie between the pipes. What more can the blue-liners do than keep a team below 20 shots?

Osgood has to make tough saves sometimes. It is what good goalies do. He seems incapable of doing that on a regular basis.

more

Filed in: NHL Teams, Detroit Red Wings, | KK Hockey | Permalink
  Tags: chris+osgood

Comments

 1 2 >       Next »

Jennemy of the Skate's avatar

A lot of people are going to hate this article. I’m not one of them.

Posted by Jennemy of the Skate from the bar car on the stress train on 10/15/10 at 02:49 PM ET

Twig's avatar

what jen said.

Posted by Twig from Houston, TX on 10/15/10 at 02:56 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Jimmy Howard had plenty of opportunities to make a big save in Tuesday’s game to earn Detroit a win.

The Red Wings made their bed with $2.14M in goaltending and a team commitment to defense that would keep them from having to rely on a guy to make saves to bail out that team defense.

You want a guy to make saves like Ryan Miller, you’ve got to pay a guy like Ryan Miller.  That cap difference is enough to pay the salaries of Valtteri Filppula and Dan Cleary.

Chris Osgood played the kind of game last night the Red Wings pay him to play.  You can’t just look at shot totals and say it looks like the Wings outplayed the stars and got let down by their goaltending because anybody who watched last night knows what happened. The Wings did not outplay the Stars, nor did they have more quality scoring chances. 

Dallas had five excellent scoring opportunities on their 15 shots and they got four goals out of them.  Osgood was the difference between a 4-1 loss and a 5-1 loss, not the reason the skaters in front of him played like shit.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/15/10 at 03:07 PM ET

Nathan's avatar

The shot total is a decent argument in some respects… the problem is when you give the puck away five or six critical times, it doesn’t matter if your defense was air tight the rest of the game.

We’re four games in, so let’s relax a little and let Ozzie play some games before we jump to conclusions. I would agree that Howard is the guy, but we still need to have them split games for a while because if Ozzie is serviceable, that’s the difference between Jimmah playing 65 games and being tired when the playoffs come or Jimmah playing 50 games and having some juice for the tourney.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 10/15/10 at 03:13 PM ET

Nate A's avatar

At some point, no matter what is happening in front of him, a goalie needs to make an unbelievable save to keep his team in the game.

Like that wide open backdoor pass on the powerplay? I believe it was Brendan Morrow’s shot?

Ozzy’s in a a precarious position here, no doubt. And he’s no youthful acrobat anymore either, but he’s not been a complete waste out there. I’d argue Howard has let in more softies than Ozzy thus far, so jumping all over him is a bit silly at this point.

Posted by Nate A from Detroit-ish on 10/15/10 at 03:32 PM ET

WingsFaninCO's avatar

Apparently only about 8 people bothered to WATCH last night’s game.  I’m not making the argument that Ozzie should be our #1, but for fuch’s sake, the wings were pathetic last night and the goals he let in weren’t softies.  I also agree with JJ’s point that our goaltending cap hit is pretty small, and there is only so much that you can expect from that. 

I’m still shocked that the Wings only allowed 15 SoG, to me it seemed more like 25+.  No, Ozzie wasn’t stellar last night, but he wasn’t bad, and even stellar goaltending doesn’t result in a win.  So untie those nooses and set down your pitchforks.  Let’s give the team, as a whole, a couple games to get itself together.  Only then will we be able to tell which indiviuals are not pulling their weight.

Oh, and anyone who tries to tell me that Detroit’s defense was even passable last night either didn’t watch the game, or has a serious case of cranial-rectal inversion, regardless of the shot totals.  I’m looking at you, Rob Otto and MLive commenters.

Posted by WingsFaninCO on 10/15/10 at 03:35 PM ET

WingsFaninCO's avatar

I’d argue Howard has let in more softies than Ozzy thus far, so jumping all over him is a bit silly at this point.

Posted by Nate A from Detroit-ish on 10/15/10 at 01:32 PM ET

Damn straight

Posted by WingsFaninCO on 10/15/10 at 03:36 PM ET

Jennemy of the Skate's avatar

Chris Osgood played the kind of game last night the Red Wings pay him to play.

Really JJ? I don’t think that was exactly the kind of game they’re paying him for. And before you accuse me of it, I’m not exactly a Howard bandwagoner either.

Posted by Jennemy of the Skate from the bar car on the stress train on 10/15/10 at 03:36 PM ET

SuperMario's avatar

i’m not from detroit but how can someone talk about ozzy like this after the amazing cup runs he has been a part of in your city?

p.s. the season is 4 games in. your team will win the presidents trophy. so let’s relax.

Posted by SuperMario from Toronto on 10/15/10 at 03:37 PM ET

mrfluffy's avatar

Like that wide open backdoor pass on the powerplay? I believe it was Brendan Morrow’s shot?

Ah, the one where the Conn Smythe-winner, one of the best two-way forwards in the entire league and future Captain of the Wings sat two feet away and watched the pretty play?

Heh…nothing on Z…that was one sh!tburger of a game for all involved. Sure Ozzie didn’t make THE save that yes, tenders usually have to surprise at least once a game…but to hang this game on him just because you spent two seconds over the last two days and checked a box score is moronic. That’s some deep-digging right there.

Posted by mrfluffy from the phone, calling Detroit, telling them it's on 10/15/10 at 03:37 PM ET

DetCapC19's avatar

Where was this article after Ozzie’s win vs. Chicago?

How about after Howard’s game against Colorado? 

Pav looked kind of lost last night, I wonder if he’s going to write an article about how Filppula should be our go-to guy for the rest of the season.

Posted by DetCapC19 from Vancouver, BC on 10/15/10 at 03:38 PM ET

Avatar

Dallas had five excellent scoring opportunities on their 15 shots and they got four goals out of them.

So it’s acceptable for a goalie to let in 80% of the opposing team’s scoring opportunites?

Posted by Garth on 10/15/10 at 03:39 PM ET

Avatar

Where was this article after Ozzie’s win vs. Chicago?

Are you for real?

There was no article because Ozzie didn’t have a .733 save percentage.

Posted by Garth on 10/15/10 at 03:41 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Really JJ? I don’t think that was exactly the kind of game they’re paying him for. And before you accuse me of it, I’m not exactly a Howard bandwagoner either.

Posted by Jennemy of the Skate from putting the b*tches in the box on 10/15/10 at 01:36 PM ET

Howard’s not part of this equation, I shouldn’t have mentioned him in the first place.  Osgood gave exactly what we’re paying for him.

Dallas had five excellent scoring opportunities on their 15 shots and they got four goals out of them.

So it’s acceptable for a goalie to let in 80% of the opposing team’s scoring opportunites?

Posted by Garth on 10/15/10 at 01:39 PM ET

No, it’s acceptable for a goalie to let in 80% of EXCELLENT scoring opportunities.  The Stars had five opportunities on plays that absolutely should have been goals and they converted four of them.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/15/10 at 03:48 PM ET

Nathan's avatar

The team has been a turnover machine for the last two games. Both goalies look bad as a result. Not really fair.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 10/15/10 at 03:49 PM ET

calquake's avatar

Please tell me oh wise ones, what goaltender in the league would have prevented 3 of those goals.  And if you mention Luongo, Miller, Broduer or 80% of the netminders in the league then you have to pay for them.  JJ is correct… on all counts.

Posted by calquake from a.k.a. Shakeandquake, beginning to feel hopeful on 10/15/10 at 04:23 PM ET

DetCapC19's avatar

Are you for real?
There was no article because Ozzie didn’t have a .733 save percentage.
Posted by Garth on 10/15/10 at 01:41 PM ET

So, everytime he has a bad game this dude’s going to write an article about it?

Why didn’t he write one after Howard’s bad game against Colorado?

Why is it that he can have a great game against Chicago but as soon as he has one so-so outing against another team, he’s no longer able to play in this league anymore?

Posted by DetCapC19 from Vancouver, BC on 10/15/10 at 04:25 PM ET

Jeff  OKWingnut's avatar

that was one sh!tburger of a game for all involved.

Amen(!)

Whats our 8 million dollar man say about that? 

“I thought they played hard. I thought we played hard,’’ Babcock said. “We did a lot of good things. We gave up 15 shots on the road. Anytime you do that we’ve done a lot of good things. We didn’t mount enough of a sustained attack and yet I thought (Dallas goalie Kari) Lehtonen was really good.’’

via Khan(!)

Granted I was watching the game (well only 2/3 of it) on a computer screen, thanks to Gary’s F-UP tv deal.

But are we talking about the same game, coach?  Really?

Posted by Jeff OKWingnut from Quest for 12 on 10/15/10 at 04:27 PM ET

Twig's avatar

ozzie is capable of making the huge saves. he did it once last night and does it in the playoffs, so the “they don’t pay him enough to make the big saves” argument is crap. he can do it. he just doesn’t way too often. kind of like robert lang in goalie pads.

Posted by Twig from Houston, TX on 10/15/10 at 04:32 PM ET

John W.'s avatar

I’m usually 1 to jump on Ozzie, but when talking about last night, c’mon.  Which 1 do you want to blame him for?  The 60 footer that went thru 4 players?  Or the puck Stuart kicked in?  Or the play where Hank was standing with his back to a wide open player while he taps it in?

The entire team is playing Eastern Conference hockey right now.  There is no commitment to team defense and the shot totals don’t really matter.  Who cares if there were only 15 shots if most of them were grade A chances.  How many times in the past have we seen the Wings get 40+ shots and only score 1 goal because they were all from the outside.  It’s all about quality, and last night they were all quality.

Posted by John W. from a bubble wrap cocoon on 10/15/10 at 04:46 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

ozzie is capable of making the huge saves. he did it once last night and does it in the playoffs, so the “they don’t pay him enough to make the big saves” argument is crap. he can do it. he just doesn’t way too often. kind of like robert lang in goalie pads.

Posted by Twig from Houston, TX on 10/15/10 at 02:32 PM ET

Yeah, he’s capable of making about 1 in 5.  If you want a guy who’s capable of consistently making 2 in 5 or better, then you have to pay more in salary.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/15/10 at 04:53 PM ET

redxblack's avatar

Osgood was awful. It’s not a question of Osgood v. Howard, but Osgood v. competence. He wasn’t. He was very bad last night.

So was Lidstrom. It feels weird saying it, but Nick was bad. Kronwall wasn’t that great either, even though he scored. Zetterberg didn’t seem to have a single serious shot all night. Hudler and Datsyuk both rang the pipe exactly once. They were just bad last night. Filppula was decent, and Miller/Eaves played above their pay grade. All in all, it’s best to let this game go gently into the good night and focus on the other 81 games in the season. I will be satisfied if this is the low spot.

Posted by redxblack from Akron Ohio on 10/15/10 at 05:10 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

How about we all change gears and you take a look at the guy you’re agreeing with here.  The knowledgeable Rob Otto the hockey writer, who has the courage to stand up and tell it like it is while the rest of the writers are burying their heads in the sand about the truth?

Rob Otto has run exactly TWO articles about the Red Wings since the end of last season. (for reference, he also has two about soccer).

In his only other Red Wings-centric article, he said this about his predictions:

I haven’t put my Red Wings’ season prediction in black and white yet because I wanted to wait until after the season started.

Part of the reason for that was that I didn’t like what I saw through most of the preseason.

There were times Detroit looked out of sync and rather pedestrian. Knowing that so many of their key parts are veterans who can sometimes lack motivation during exhibition games, I wanted to wait until the games counted before I took a critical look at the team.

That first sentence probably should say “I haven’t put my Red Wings’ season prediction in black and white yet because I had other things to talk about.”

Second sentence: “Part of the reason for that was that I didn’t like what I saw perusing the scoresheets through most of the preseason”

The hockey article that Otto wrote before that?

2010 Stanley Cup Finals feeling like Déjà vu

Yeah, that’s an article where hockey-savvy Rob Otto talks about how he thinks this year’s finals looked like the previous year’s finals and he hedges his bets about Philadelphia coming back on Chicago.  You can read that too and try to tell me if you think he watched a single game of that finals series.

Otto only found it necessary to write about two of the five games in the Sharks series, the second article about how the game four win didn’t mean anything (which is about as prophetic as Little Orphan Annie singing about how the sun will come out tomorrow). 

THIS is the guy to whom you’re hitching your wagons.  I’ll gladly eat a goddamned shoe if he even watched last night’s game.  You want to get down on Osgood for his last two years’ worth of inconsistency, then don’t let me stand in the way of that, but if you can be bothered to pick yourself up from scoreboard watching just long enough to think about context, you should realize that last night’s game is a bad example for any kind of personal quest to get rid of the guy.  Osgood had 18 skaters in front of him last night and just about 15 of them had what I’m hoping is their worst game of the season.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/15/10 at 05:17 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

Osgood is old.  it’s time for him to play only a true backup role, not split games with Howard.

Osgood’s reflexes are gone, his positioning is poor, and his lateral movement is slow.  Hasek was able to play to an older age because his reflexes and mobility started out so much higher than everyone else, when he lost a step he was still quick.  with Osgood that’s not the case.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 10/15/10 at 05:25 PM ET

perfection's avatar

this is what i was going to say… who the hell is this otto guy anyway and why on earth does anyone care what he thinks?

to me, whether this “article” is right or wrong is not really the issue. why is this conversation even taking place this early in the season? we’ve played 4 games, ozzie was pretty good one and not so good the other and i think the same could be said of howard.

regardless, i don’t think there was ever a question over who our “starter” is. in fact, i recall tick tock saying last year that howard was suppose to take over as the #1 guy this year all along. it was last year where he actually took a role that was not originally his.

so ozzie’s lost a step, whatever. let me put it this way, if jimmy howard goes down with an injury in the stanley cup finals, there is NO other backup in the league i would rather have come off the bench in that situation. NONE. period.

also - for you ozzie dissers, howard is learning an element of the game from ozzie that too many goalies never figure out and that is how to stay even keel. ozzie is a master at not getting too high or low. howard is already showing that he is learning that very un-Legace like quality which will definitely take him much farther in his career.

Posted by perfection from LaLaLand on 10/15/10 at 05:27 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

Osgood had 18 skaters in front of him last night and just about 15 of them had what I’m hoping is their worst game of the season.

so Osgood being out of position and letting a goal sneak by him 30 seconds into the game on a penalty kill point shot is the fault of those players having a bad game?

what about Richards’ chip-shot for the fourth goal that (gasp!) went to the left of Osgood because his lateral movement and positioning are poor and he wasn’t properly lined up between the puck and the net?

on both of those shots all Osgood has to to is be where he belongs and they hit him.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 10/15/10 at 05:28 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

so Osgood being out of position and letting a goal sneak by him 30 seconds into the game on a penalty kill point shot is the fault of those players having a bad game?

what about Richards’ chip-shot for the fourth goal that (gasp!) went to the left of Osgood because his lateral movement and positioning are poor and he wasn’t properly lined up between the puck and the net?

on both of those shots all Osgood has to to is be where he belongs and they hit him.

You mean the slapshot where Osgood had both Ruslan Salei AND Brenden Morrow screening him?  Yeah, I’m ok with saying that Brad Stuart being in the box for taking a stupid boarding penalty and Ruslan Salei not only failing to clear the zone when he had a chance but also screening his own goalie while failing to block the shot is a problem of the guys in front of Osgood.

Oh, I see you’re also talking about the Richards shot from the low slot, where shooting percentages go to skyrocket.  The Richards shot that Osgood moved laterally on, but could have only completely shadowed the net if he had come three feet out of his crease, leaving both sides open for tip-ins by a Dallas Star who wasn’t being covered right by Pavel Datsyuk, a Dallas Star standing right on the doorstep (but admittedly being covered pretty well by Kronwall), or the Dallas Star with the puck, who had completely stepped away from Brad Stuart, who showed all the grace of a newborn gazelle on that play.  Let’s also not mention that almost every goaltender ever says that backhand shots are incredibly difficult to stop from there because it’s almost impossible to judge where the point of aim is.

Yeah, let’s blame Osgood for that one while we’re at it.  Osgood was EXACTLY where he belongs on both of those plays, the people in front of him failed him.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/15/10 at 05:33 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

JJ, next time Howard plays pay attention to where he is on shots like that.  he’s better than Osgood at having pucks (that he doesn’t see) hit him.  he has better instincts.

as for the Richards shot, I never said Osgood needed to cover the whole net.  what I said was he needed to be between the puck and the net, and he wasn’t.  he was to the right of that line and the puck (like the first shot) when to his left and in.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 10/15/10 at 05:58 PM ET

Avatar

Why didn’t he write one after Howard’s bad game against Colorado?

Well, there are two reasons:

1) Jimmy let in 4 goals on 38 shots (.890 save %), not 4 goals on 15 shots (.733 save %).  See that?  How he let in the same number of goals when facing 2.5x the shots than Osgood faced?  Sorry, but that’s a significant difference.

2) Jimmy Howard was a Calder finalist last year and we know that he can bounce back whereas Chris Osgood has had two bad regular seasons in a row, so obviously the microscope is going to be on him, that’s just logical.  Sorry, but it’s noteworthy that he’s been talking about how good he feels and how confident everyone in the organization is in him this year and how they want to be able to count on him to be a reliable backup.

Posted by Garth on 10/15/10 at 05:59 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

as for the Richards shot, I never said Osgood needed to cover the whole net.  what I said was he needed to be between the puck and the net, and he wasn’t.  he was to the right of that line and the puck (like the first shot) when to his left and in.

That shot went over his pad and in, right next to his hip.  That’s a hole that goaltenders cannot close while moving laterally to square to a shooter.  If he moves far enough to his left to have his torso block that shot, then he’s leaving a very large amount of space open to the right (which is back to Neal’s forehand, which is a place he could have gone). 

I’m not sure if Howard’s ability to have pucks hit him while he’s screened is a matter of instincts or a matter of Howard being three inches taller and thirty pounds heavier.  Jimmy Howard is a bigger guy.  I can accept that in a black-and-white world of it, there is no correction for fairness about that and I absolutely agree, but if you’re looking at the replay of that goal, Osgood was in the right position.  He tracked the puck across the ice and was at the top of the crease at the correct angle.  The instant he had to look around both Morrow and Salei was the instant the puck was already on him.  He was positioned to be taking up the maximum possible space there without having seen the wind-up.

Osgood is the Red Wings backup and he played as well as any goaltender in his pay range can be expected.  He actually played as well as many goaltenders making three or more times his salary would have played, given the circumstances.

For Garth:

1) Jimmy let in 4 goals on 38 shots (.890 save %), not 4 goals on 15 shots (.733 save %).  See that?  How he let in the same number of goals when facing 2.5x the shots than Osgood faced?  Sorry, but that’s a significant difference.

Yes, and if you’re only looking at the stat sheets, that’s a perfectly reasonable argument.  I know another person who only tends to look at stat sheets.  He has a very good reputation around here.  Osgood played better last night than Howard played on Tuesday.  That doesn’t mean Osgood should be the starter, just that if you want to talk about bad games, Howard’s Tuesday performance is the worst game by a Red Wings goaltender so far this season.  Whereas Osgood failed to stop four excellent scoring opportunities, Howard failed to stop two shots he should have had (and some would argue three).

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/15/10 at 06:14 PM ET

calquake's avatar

Wow.  If you don’t like Osgood or feel his skills have eroded fine.  But to blame him alone for last night’s debacle is to have your head in the sand.  It was a team effort.  As someone (JJ I think) pointed out earlier, of the 18 skaters out on the ice last night, only 15 or so decided to show up.  Put Osgood in that category if you want but he had plenty of company.

Posted by calquake from a.k.a. Shakeandquake, beginning to feel hopeful on 10/15/10 at 06:17 PM ET

Avatar

Osgood is old.  it’s time for him to play only a true backup role, not split games with Howard.

Oz has started the second of back-to-back games (CHI), and against a team he’s 28-12-4 against, vs Howard’s record of 1-3-1 (DAL). Four games into a season is a little early to assume splitting games with Howard is going to be a trend. Although apparently its not too early to over-react.

Jimmy let in 4 goals on 38 shots (.890 save %), not 4 goals on 15 shots (.733 save %).  See that?  How he let in the same number of goals when facing 2.5x the shots than Osgood faced?  Sorry, but that’s a significant difference.

Its a significant statistical difference but doesn’t necessarily tell the story of the quality of chances. Honest question Garth, did you see the game? I like to beat up on Ozzie as much as the next guy but, to me, it really just was “one of those games”. The team played much worse than 15 shots allowed indicated, and Oz wasn’t as bad as .733 S%.

I’m all for Howard getting 60+ starts, but this is scapegoating Oz , the focus should be on the team.

Posted by dumbasrocks on 10/15/10 at 06:18 PM ET

calquake's avatar

of the 18 skaters out on the ice last night, only 15 or so decided to show up.  Put Osgood in that category if you want but he had plenty of company.
Posted by calquake on 10/15/10 at 04:17 PM ET

Oops….  meant to say: of the 18 skaters out on the ice last night, 15 or so decided not to show up.

Posted by calquake from a.k.a. Shakeandquake, beginning to feel hopeful on 10/15/10 at 06:30 PM ET

PDXWing's avatar

Sorry, but that’s a significant difference.

Statistically, that’s a significant difference.  Qualitatively, it’s not, in my opinion.  I was at the game last night, and the Wings looked bad.  Out of sync. Scrambling all over the place, with weird turnovers in the neutral zone, muffed passes.  I turned to the Wings fan next to me and commented early on that they looked out of sorts. Ozzy looked ok, not great.  The Wings though, they looked like they were in the preseason with 3 defenders playing that were likely headed to GR. 

The real difference in these games was not the play of the goaltender, but the absence of Rafalski. He’s a guy we take for granted, but he is critical to the health of the D.  The problem with the Wings the past two games have been problems getting the puck to the offense.  Janik and Salei have struggled to make good outlet passes. Lidstrom looked pedestrian a couple of times last night, probably because he’s splitting his time between Kindl and Stuart, who has not had a good start to his year.  The goal that Stuart kicked in was a direct result of a turnover in the neutral zone - that whole play never should have happened. The 3rd line has not clicked, and Modano has had a bunch of shot blocked when he’s playing the point on the PP. 

At this point, I’d like to see Smith or Meech get a shot before Janik plays more time (there’s probably cap issues that I’m neglecting with that statement).  Kindl looks like he’s gaining confidence, but he looks like a rookie. Stuart needs to resume his status as a stay at home guy with Kronwall.  Big E and Rafalski are needed back.

Posted by PDXWing on 10/15/10 at 06:35 PM ET

Osrt's avatar

I poop on you all.

Posted by Osrt on 10/15/10 at 06:46 PM ET

HockeyTownTodd's avatar

There is only 3 red wings that don’t owe Ozzie an apology for last night.
Babcock should give Ozzie the start in PHO on Sat..

Posted by HockeyTownTodd on 10/15/10 at 07:16 PM ET

DetCapC19's avatar

Posted by Garth on 10/15/10 at 03:59 PM ET

1) Jimmy let in 4 goals on 38 shots (.890 save %), not 4 goals on 15 shots (.733 save %).  See that?  How he let in the same number of goals when facing 2.5x the shots than Osgood faced?  Sorry, but that’s a significant difference.

I agree with what PDXWing says above.

Could Osgood have stopped 1 or 2 of those?  Maybe.  But the only difference between his night and Howie’s was that Howie had the goal support (and a 2 goal lead).

Posted by DetCapC19 from Vancouver, BC on 10/15/10 at 07:18 PM ET

Jennemy of the Skate's avatar

I poop on you all.

Posted by Osrt on 10/15/10 at 04:46 PM ET

Thank you, Triumph the Insult Dog. lol.

Posted by Jennemy of the Skate from the bar car on the stress train on 10/15/10 at 07:20 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

JJ, Osgood wasn’t moving laterally.  he had MOVED laterally and stopped short of where he should have been.  he didn’t adjust as the player (Neal, for some reason I thought it was Richards) continued to move across in front of him.  if he’s in position it hits him in the gut.

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?hlg=20102011,2,46&event=DAL452

at this point, the puck is still on Neal’s stick and he’s about to shoot it.  look where Osgood is and look where the puck is.  Osgood?  centered in front of the net.  the puck is way to the left.  Osgood is out of position, and he knows exactly where the puck is, he could see it the whole time.

I said it all last year, too…that Osgood’s positioning has gotten really bad.  it looks like he did not correct it in the offseason.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 10/15/10 at 07:30 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Paul, I appreciate your hard work in capturing screen shots.  You showed fantastically that what Fistric did to Franzen was indeed an elbow.  What you didn’t show here was that Osgood took another half-hitch to his left before Neal got that shot off.

If you look at the still frame I believe two after that (where Kronwall is significantly more bent over), you can see that the puck has left Neal’s stick, but has not passed Osgood yet.  In that frame, Osgood is about a foot farther to his left.

He tracked the puck to the center, respecting that Neal still had the ability to bring it back to his forehand.  If he had lunged way out to the left on that play, everybody would be screaming about how he overplayed the puck and took himself out of position.  This is not a positioning problem by Osgood.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/15/10 at 07:43 PM ET

 1 2 >       Next »

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.

Smileys

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Feed

Most Recent Blog Posts

About Kukla's Korner Hockey

Paul Kukla founded Kukla’s Korner in 2005 and the site has since become the must-read site on the ‘net for all the latest happenings around the NHL.

From breaking news to in-depth stories around the league, KK Hockey is updated with fresh stories all day long and will bring you the latest news as quickly as possible.

Email Paul anytime at pk@kuklaskorner.com