It's a hunch based on the evidence currently at hand.
Well, not exactly.
2004: Won in a great game against UMass in HE championship. Pulled from the first game of the Frozen Four (team won late behind Doyle). Lost in the Championship game.
2005: Lost to BC in the HE semis. Lost to Minnesota in round 1 of NCAA tourney.
So, if you're pointing at his NCAA postseason big-gameness, it looks like most of the time he played great... just not great enough to win too much.
The point is that there's no magic formula when it comes to goalies and playoff experience,
There is no magic formula to anything, but there are some general guidelines of probability.
so going with the veteran who's rusted to the bench is not a better option than going with the rookie that has carried you to the playoffs on his back.
I agree, but that's not the point. The point is that you seem to be implying that going with a playoff untested rookie has no downside compared to other options. Obviously that just isn't true. In this specific case Detroit has to go with Howard because they made that decision two months ago and now have no time.
It's more likely that the guy who's playing well will continue playing well, and the guy who's been ice cold for 5 months will not thaw and catch fire overnight. Not rocket science.
You've shifted the subject you are speaking about.
Sooooo.....you're saying that Ozzie has given up 63 goals in 23 appearances this year because the offense isn't scoring goals?
Again, you are shifting the subject. You have repeatedly pointed out Osgood's poor winning percentage as evidence of his poor play. I am merely pointing out that he hasn't gotten much support this year, so he's had very little opportunity to get on any kind of roll that may have come from winning a game or two (or three) earlier in the year.
Then what are you arguing about? This is about whether or not they should sit Howard and give Ozzie a bunch of starts to get ready for the playoffs - if Ozzie ever sees the ice in the playoffs it will be due to "some disaster", as you suggest.
You are shifting the subject. My comment was in response to your contention that Ozzie did fine in spot duty previously.
Your "but Ozzie is still good, just give him a chance, even though Howard should start in the playoffs!" straw man/nonsense doesn't have any bearing on this particular discussion.
As I haven't said that, I agree.
What exactly is your "thesis" here? That Ozzie is still good if you give him enough starts?
That Osgood can be better if you give him enough starts, and if you aren't going to give him enough starts move him because he is adversely affected by limited playing time, relative to other potential options at backup.
The question mark would be 10 times bigger if it were Osgood starting instead of Howard.
Disagree. You continue to underrate the impact of NHL inexperience in the postseason, especially for goalies.
Maybe Ozzie can get his game back together for next season, but his game is in pieces right now and 3 games before the start of the playoffs is not the time to try and put it back together. This is the time to get the team running as best as you can and then hope it holds up in the playoffs.
This is why a couple months ago I cautioned against throwing Osgood out with the garbage so finally, at least as far as the 2009-10 season goes. Detroit now doesn't have the time to bring him back up to game speed, so they have no real other choice.
Que sa'ra. I hope Howard continues to exceed expectations.