Osgood really that good? A common complaint about Chris Osgood is that he’s just the product of a good defensive system. We’ve made it and we believe it. If you stuck Osgood on the Penguins, they probably don’t get out of the first round. But he doesn’t play on the Penguins. He plays on the Red Wings. And he’s gotten them to the Stanley Cup final for the second consecutive season. Who care’s if he’s part of a system? Especially if it’s a really successful system.

So sick of this.

It’s not a coincidence Ozzie has better numbers than Fleury.

EN is getting to be one of the worst blogs on the web. It’d be nice if those guys had, I don’t know, watched Ozzie dominate in the first period of games one and two against Columbus, calmly win a game seven against the Ducks, and bail his team out during periods two and three against Chicago in game five. And those are just the obvious ones.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 05/29/09 at 07:48 AM ET

If you stuck Osgood on the Penguins, they probably don’t get out of the first round.

Unbelievable.

Posted by IwoCPO from Sunny San Diego, bitches on 05/29/09 at 07:57 AM ET

Well Seth’s obviously on to something.  I mean, it was only due to Fleury’s amazing play in the first round that the Pens were able to get past the Flyers.

Look, if you can go head to head with Martin Biron in the playoffs and come out on top… man.  Impressive.

I hate the Finals.  All the asshat prognosticators come out of the woodwork and say idiotic things with next to no rational thought, as though the fact that they have a job for ClickonDetroit or the BumF’nEgypt County Register means that they can simulate a full NHL 1997 season on their Dreamcast to get caught up on All Things Hockey and count on their dazzling prose to make up the difference.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 05/29/09 at 08:14 AM ET

With Osgood in goal we probably wouldn’t even be in the playoffs, but I wouldn’t count him out as a playoff performer.

And “Empty Netters” is a decent blog. If you think its vision is hampered by a biased splinter, you’re probably bothered by a pole in the ocular area.

Posted by Moq from Denmark on 05/29/09 at 08:19 AM ET

Then why didn’t Curtis Joseph win a Cup?  Or Manny Legace?  If it is ALL the system, then ANY goaltender should be able to win behind it.

With Clemmensson’s performance in New Jersey this year, you would have a better case advancing Brodeur as a “product of the system” (and I know people have, but not as often or as vehemently as with Osgood).

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 05/29/09 at 08:23 AM ET

And “Empty Netters” is a decent blog. If you think its vision is hampered by a biased splinter,

I don’t think he’s biased, just stupid.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 05/29/09 at 08:55 AM ET

No one - or very few - claims that it’s all about the system and that any goaltender would do equally well. That doesn’t follow from the assertion that Osgood is part of really succesful system. You could probaly extract a few assets that makes Osgood particularly suited for that system. (I don’t watch enough Detroit games to do that.) Something not inherent to just about any replacement imaginable.

In reality, you could probably argue that most succesful goaltenders rely on a well-adapted system. I don’t think there’s a lot of difference between the socalled elite goaltenders and the rest.

And Fleury hasn’t exactly been heralded by experts as the next Patrick Roy either. In essence, neither should be in the finals for the second year in a row. But they are.

Posted by Moq from Denmark on 05/29/09 at 09:01 AM ET

Then why didn’t Curtis Joseph win a Cup?  Or Manny Legace?  If it is ALL the system, then ANY goaltender should be able to win behind it.
With Clemmensson’s performance in New Jersey this year, you would have a better case advancing Brodeur as a “product of the system” (and I know people have, but not as often or as vehemently as with Osgood).

And something else that a whole bunch of people routinely underrate… top to bottom the East stinks compared to the West.  The West kills the East head to head, and they have for years now.

Also, travel is much worse in the West.  If you just picked up the Devils and dropped them into the Western Conference, with the increased level of competition and the wildly increased stress of travel you’d see all those goalie numbers of Brodeur’s drop like a rock.

That dude isn’t starting 72-78 games a year when he’s hopping time zones three times in a week to play Anaheim, San Jose and Detroit in a 4 game in 7 night trip.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 05/29/09 at 09:16 AM ET

And Fleury hasn’t exactly been heralded by experts as the next Patrick Roy either. In essence, neither should be in the finals for the second year in a row. But they are.

Maybe that says more about the silliness of some presumptions from observers regarding what makes a good playoff club and/or goalie than it does about the goalies themselves?

I think Pittsburgh is in the Finals because they are the best team in the East.

I also think three of the final four teams in the West would beat them in a seven game series, health and refereeing being equal.  Vancouver being the exception.

Healthy, Detroit beats them in 4-5, Anaheim in 5-6, and Chicago in 6-7.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 05/29/09 at 09:24 AM ET

And something else that a whole bunch of people routinely underrate… top to bottom the East stinks compared to the West.  The West kills the East head to head, and they have for years now.

That’s as far from obvious as it used to be if you look at the regular season. The only Eastern playoff team with a losing record versus the West was Washington Capitals (8-10-0). The best record belonged to the Montreal Canadians (13-4-1). Arguably the worst playoff team in the East this year.

Among the Western playoff teams, both St. Louis (7-10-1) and Anaheim (7-10-1) had a negative record versus the East. Interestingly enough, the arguably worst playoff team (IMO) - Columbus - had the best record (13-3-2).

However, I would agree that the top teams in the West are marginally better and the East has the worst teams in the league (though quite a few West teams could qualify). Even so, there’s a significant drop-off in quality from Detroit to the rest of the West. Dominance of one team doesn’t suggest a uniform conference strength.

Posted by Moq from Denmark on 05/29/09 at 11:11 AM ET

OTAY BUCKWHEAT !!!!

Good Lord I have a Ton of respect for the Rd Wings OrganIzation, But most of there fans are Nuckin Futs

If the Pens weren’t in the Finals I would be rooting for Detroit just to let you Geniuses know

Posted by Evilpens on 05/29/09 at 11:14 AM ET

Without Ozzie the Wings would not have gotten out of the first Round last year and they would have lost to the kids in Chi-town this year.

Posted by JR from Mich on 05/29/09 at 11:15 AM ET

I also think three of the final four teams in the West would beat them in a seven game series, health and refereeing being equal.  Vancouver being the exception.

That’s your prerogative, ie. having an opinion. I tend to disagree.

Detroit is heads and shoulders above the rest of the West. (The Anaheim debacle was just sloppy effort, I had you in five.) Therefore I think that not only Pittsburgh, but also Philadelphia, New Jersey and a healthy Boston could beat the rest. I’m unsure about Carolina despite the evident success.

Opinion is easy.

Posted by Moq from Denmark on 05/29/09 at 11:20 AM ET

Dominance of one team doesn’t suggest a uniform conference strength.

Then I would suggest you look at what the West Conference as a whole does to the East Conference as a whole, which would suggest a more uniform Conference strength.  And by the way, IIRC this past year was the least dominant year for the West post lockout… and they still got more than 54% of possible points in the interconference games.  That’s not just the Red Wings doing that.

I’m not saying the #15 West team would kill the Pens or anything, but there’s a fairly obvious difference in the level of play between the two Conferences, and it’s something that almost never even gets a mention when commentators of any stripe attempt to compare players between the two Conferences.

So, when someone says ‘such and such player from the West wouldn’t do so well on such and such Eastern team’, I always get a little bit of a chuckle out of that, because there’s just about no serious track record of any players going West to East and not at least meeting their previous levels of play, if not surpassing them… while the opposite certainly does happen.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 05/29/09 at 12:19 PM ET

There’s quite a bit of disarity between the “top to bottom the East stinks” and the 54% points advantage of the West (I’ll take your number as gospel this time). Given that one point lost would add a point to the position automatically, it would only require a 4% point shift to equalize the difference. That’s explained with stronger top teams, I use the plural form hesitantly, and less pronounced bottom feeders. Exactly as I described previously. The interconference record of the playoff team that I mentioned also suggests that most them do quite well against the opposite conference.

There’s certainly a difference of play, but not necessarily a substantial difference in the level of play. The offensive stars in the East that tend to dominate among the league leaders in points benefits from a less defensively minded attitude in the East, and some of the stars in the West trade points potential for a more pronounced two-way attitude. Without evidence, I tend to think that the better defensive attitude and attention to defensive systems in the West is the cause of their advantage. Any offensive player going from West to East will probably benefit from greater offensive freedom, while an Ovechkin type would have to develop a defensive awareness to play for any western team. The assumption of level is a simplification.

If you look at the Cup distribution in ten and twenty year spans (lockout year discounted), it’s 6-4 and 11-9 in favour of the West with various periods of dominance to either conference.

Posted by Moq from Denmark on 05/29/09 at 01:19 PM ET

• Osgood really that good? A common complaint about Chris Osgood is that he’s just the product of a good defensive system. We’ve made it and we believe it. If you stuck Osgood on the Penguins, they probably don’t get out of the first round. But he doesn’t play on the Penguins. He plays on the Red Wings. And he’s gotten them to the Stanley Cup final for the second consecutive season. Who care’s if he’s part of a system? Especially if it’s a really successful system.

Sounds like TPSH.

Posted by SYF from a "Bron-Y-Aur Stomp" on 05/29/09 at 01:36 PM ET

Sounds like TPSH.

Not quite.  I didn’t see the word “elite” in there anywhere.

Posted by Incognetis from Delaware... Hi... I'm in... Delaware on 05/29/09 at 01:53 PM ET

Its called Detroit supports their goalie, when you leave him out to dry your playoff season is over.

Posted by Arb on 05/29/09 at 03:18 PM ET