View Single Post
Old
01-18-2013, 06:29 PM
  #98
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,485
vCash: 500
When vs Why

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Interesting take.

One comment, though. the expansion era featured almost predominantly tandems, while Osgood's era has featured very set "starter and backup" roles. Since 1994, there have been 225 instances of a goalie playing 60+ games, or 13 per season. That he did it four times in this period is not particularly impressive. On the other hand, from 1967 through 1980, there were 101 instances of a goalie even playing 50 games, or approximately 202 if "normalized" to a 30-team league.

Stated differently, post-expansion, Cheevers had seasons at 6th, 7th, and 10th in NHL minutes (not counting his 7th in 1967, for obvious reasons), as well as 1st, 3rd, and 4th in the WHA, however you wish to translate that. Osgood was 6th, 8th, and 9th in his biggest minute seasons. All things considered, it's difficult to see how either would have a substantial advantage in terms of being a "workhorse" goalie within the context of their era.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall you saying much about Tony Esposito's incredible string of very high minute seasons.
No one is disputing the "when" part, rather the focus is on the "why".

As Killion points out Cheevers did not have the technical foundation nor did he have the mindset to play a workhorse role.

Osgood while technically weaker, worked at his craft and had the mindset of a workhorse(lite).

As for Tony Esposito his ability to eat a lot of minutes was his only asset. But at the end of the season there was no team reward. With Cheevers or Osgood there were some rewards.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote