View Single Post
02-09-2013, 01:51 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I didn't want to comment, but yes, Osgood's 1998 was the standard example for a goalie carried to the Cup by his teammates until Niemi in 2010.
Niemi was average in his Cup run. Osgood wasn't perfect, but was damn good and came up huge when his team needed him to. Chicago in 2010 could have literally had any starting goaltender in the NHL and they win the Cup.

Osgood gets a lot of crap because:
a) goalies of his era tend to have large personalities
b) Osgood had a pretty strong defensive team (generally required for a Cup winner)
c) Mike Vernon (an arguable Hall of Famer at the end of his prime) was his partner in net for three years and (most specifically) Vernon started over Osgood in 1997 and won the Smythe, despite Osgood playing more regular season games and having taken the team to the WCF the year before.

Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Did you just say Osgood's playoff run in 1998 was potentially Smythe worthy???
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
I gotta stick up for Osgood here. There was an atrocious goal in that Dallas series, an OMG game against Phoenix, and Kolzig was having one of those all-time runs, but that was a good playoff. A damn good playoff. Let's say that Phoenix game (just the second game of the playoffs) doesn't happen: He's got a .927 in that run instead of a .918. Let's not condemn a man over one game in a 22-game playoff. It's not about cumulative stats in the post-season; having one FUBAR game can kill the numbers, but in the long run, it's better to have a goalie let in seven in one game than four in one and three in another.

EDIT: But no, he wasn't a Smythe guy that year. Haha, just no. No. Wrong. No.
It was better than Ranford's or Ward's runs that won the Smythe.

And I didn't say Osgood should have won the Smythe. I said it was Smythe-worthy, in the same sense that Messier's 1994 run was Smythe-worthy. He was #3 at best on the list.

Speaking of 1994, Osgood and Richter had comparable performances. What's your opinion of Richter?

Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
And how is his 1.63 ppg in 1990 a massive outlier when he had 8 other seasons over 1.31 ppg?

I should mention, that's a mark that was hit 14 times by gretzky, 11 times by lemieux (min 50 games), 9 by Dionne and 8 times by nobody else in history.
1.63 against 1.31 is an increase of almost 25%. That's equivalent to a steady at-PPG player hitting 100 points in a random year of his career. It's an insane jump.

It's like saying Yzerman's 1.94 isn't an outlier in his (or anyone's) career.

Also, raw PPG is a wonderful stat when you're going to pimp a player who spent their prime in the 80s/early 90s and who played on a good team with good players during their prime.

It gets in the way when you start talking about players who played in the DPE, the O6, etc. and didn't have the benefit of ridiculous scoring across the board because of weak defensive play and goalies who looked like they were plucked from the stands.

If we tone it down a bit, say maybe Messier's 129 was an 86 point season, and that PPG is 1.09 instead of 1.63, he's looking at that compared to a PPG of 0.87 (instead of 1.31). That's a pretty darn big increase for one season.

Using HR's adjusted stats, Messier's top season (89-90) is 108, his next season (95-96) is 95, he hits 93, and then 91 twice. His next highest marks are 87, 85, 80, but he also has 65 in 63, and 77 in 72 as far as PPG seasons go.

By comparison:
Yzerman tops out at 128, 111, 106, and then drops to 97, 92, 91. Following that are 89, 86, 84. He also has 85 in 64 games, and 79 in 75, 75 in 58, 56 in 54, 55 in 52.

Both players have a noticeable peak offensive season. Messier's is even more noticeable if you use raw numbers instead of adjusted stats. He never approached that level offensively over a full season outside of that season. Not even close.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote