HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Top 10 hockey myths?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-07-2013, 12:19 AM
  #101
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Look up "system goalie" in the dictionary: In lieu of a definition it has a picture of Chris Osgood.
By "system goalie" I am assuming you mean a goalie who needs a defensive system to succeed?

Well, then the entire NHL is full of system goalies.

If you mean a goaltender capable of adapting to various defensive and offensive systems... I'm not sure how that's a bad thing.

But your usage definitely suggests a negative connotation.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 12:31 AM
  #102
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
By "system goalie" I am assuming you mean a goalie who needs a defensive system to succeed?

Well, then the entire NHL is full of system goalies.

If you mean a goaltender capable of adapting to various defensive and offensive systems... I'm not sure how that's a bad thing.

But your usage definitely suggests a negative connotation.
It means the goaltender who's a product of the system in front of him and not as good as his stats indicate. Is that Dick and Jane enough for you to get it?

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 12:56 AM
  #103
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
It means the goaltender who's a product of the system in front of him and not as good as his stats indicate. Is that Dick and Jane enough for you to get it?
Ah. So someone like Tim Thomas?

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 01:10 AM
  #104
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Ah. So someone like Tim Thomas?
Or Brian Elliot.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 01:27 AM
  #105
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Or Brian Elliot.
Neither of whom are 400+ game winners who played for three different teams (and one team twice) with success.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 01:37 AM
  #106
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Neither of whom are 400+ game winners who played for three different teams (and one team twice) with success.
Neither of them played for a stacked team like the Red Wings either.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 01:42 AM
  #107
Uncle Rotter
Registered User
 
Uncle Rotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Kelowna, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crosbyfan View Post
Only allowed 2 goals late in the Semi-Final game against Slovakia to preserve a 3-2 win.

Only let in one goal in the last minute against USA, to get the Final game into OT, which led to a Gold Medal.

So as you can see, he was pretty clutch.
He's played 10 elimination games at the Olympics, World Cup, World Championships. His record is 10-0 (4 OT, 6 by one goal)

Uncle Rotter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 01:52 AM
  #108
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Neither of them played for a stacked team like the Red Wings either.
You do realize how few goalies have won 400 games, right?

And Osgood's 1998 Wings weren't so stacked, were they? The #4 defenseman was Anders Eriksson, in his rookie season.

Did those other 400-win goalies never play for stacked teams? Curtis Joseph is representative of the group in that his Blues/Oilers/Leafs career on mediocre teams is how the others did it too?

Patrick Roy didn't play hundreds of games and get hundreds of wins on a stacked Colorado team. Ed Belfour didn't do the same in Chicago in the early 90s or Dallas in the late 90s/early 00s. Martin Brodeur never played for a stacked team and certainly never had defensive help. Can't consider Grant Fuhr to have had a stacked team, right?

All-time great goalies generally play on great teams. It's a factual correlation. For some reason you and others choose to punish Osgood for this. Is it because Mike Vernon had success in Detroit's net in 1997? Is it because Hasek was at least as good as a shooter tutor in 2001-02?

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 02:00 AM
  #109
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
You do realize how few goalies have won 400 games, right?

And Osgood's 1998 Wings weren't so stacked, were they? The #4 defenseman was Anders Eriksson, in his rookie season.

Did those other 400-win goalies never play for stacked teams? Curtis Joseph is representative of the group in that his Blues/Oilers/Leafs career on mediocre teams is how the others did it too?

Patrick Roy didn't play hundreds of games and get hundreds of wins on a stacked Colorado team. Ed Belfour didn't do the same in Chicago in the early 90s or Dallas in the late 90s/early 00s. Martin Brodeur never played for a stacked team and certainly never had defensive help. Can't consider Grant Fuhr to have had a stacked team, right?

All-time great goalies generally play on great teams. It's a factual correlation. For some reason you and others choose to punish Osgood for this. Is it because Mike Vernon had success in Detroit's net in 1997? Is it because Hasek was at least as good as a shooter tutor in 2001-02?
Sure all-time great goalies can play on stacked teams.....Osgood doesn't happen to be one of them.

And spare me the "poor unappreciated Red Wing" spiel: I see Brodeur get criticized all the time for being a product of Lemaire's trap.....and with far less justification than the critique that Osgood gets.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 08:20 AM
  #110
BSHH
HSVer & Rotflügel
 
BSHH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hamburg
Country: Germany
Posts: 1,418
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
Yes, JUST looking at his save percentage those two years you can overlook the defense's ability to prevent quality chances up close and to clear rebounds. Lidstrom, Rafalski, Stuart and Kronwall had little to do with it.
You forgot to name Lebda and Lilja, Detroit's bottom pairing in 2008. At least on these boards, both are some sort of legend themselves... However, I also think Osgood is a little below HoF standards.

Gruß,
BSHH

BSHH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 09:24 AM
  #111
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Sure all-time great goalies can play on stacked teams.....Osgood doesn't happen to be one of them.

And spare me the "poor unappreciated Red Wing" spiel: I see Brodeur get criticized all the time for being a product of Lemaire's trap.....and with far less justification than the critique that Osgood gets.
You do realize that the critique Osgood gets is based on three things:

The "stacked" 1995-96 team (the year Osgood received Hart votes), the fact that the Wings managed success with Osgood for years after, and the "All-Time ridiculous team" in 2002, which was when Osgood was in New York.

It's like bagging on Brad Park for Boston's years with Orr/Esposito, or Pat LaFontaine for the NYI dynasty years. The common misconception among younger fans that Yzerman's success in his offensive prime is somehow linked to the depth of the 90s teams. And of course the idea that Sakic's handful of years on a bad Quebec team are equivalent to Yzerman's time on a bad Detroit team - and it doesn't matter that Sakic played his prime (and basically a whole decade in total) alongside Forsberg on the power play, with Sundin, Nolan, Hejduk, Tanguay, and Clark intermixed in that period and just before as well.

Or tearing Slava Fetisov, Igor Larionov, and Sergei Makarov down as "overrated and not truly ever elite players" for their NHL careers despite their age when they first started in the league, despite strong performance in their mid/late 30s.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 09:43 AM
  #112
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BSHH View Post
You forgot to name Lebda and Lilja, Detroit's bottom pairing in 2008. At least on these boards, both are some sort of legend themselves... However, I also think Osgood is a little below HoF standards.

Gruß,
BSHH
Osgood is better than many HHOF goalies and deserves to be inducted. The claim "but he played on a stacked team!" can be used against a great many of those in the Hall already who do not have the 401 career RS wins or 74 playoff wins (or anywhere NEAR that) Osgood does. And that's even when you consider things such as schedule length.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 09:58 AM
  #113
Wrigley
.
 
Wrigley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Osgood is better than many HHOF goalies and deserves to be inducted. The claim "but he played on a stacked team!" can be used against a great many of those in the Hall already who do not have the 401 career RS wins or 74 playoff wins (or anywhere NEAR that) Osgood does. And that's even when you consider things such as schedule length.
Agreed. He and Cujo should both get in.

Wrigley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 10:02 AM
  #114
tjcurrie
Registered User
 
tjcurrie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gibbons, Alberta
Posts: 3,669
vCash: 500
I think a good one to debate would be the one against Europeans ie. "You can't win with x amount of Europeans", etc etc. Fact or myth?

tjcurrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 10:09 AM
  #115
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 39,715
vCash: 500
One of the greatest hockey myths: Wayne Gretzky being "protected" by the league and having a bodyguard with him at all times. Funny, most of his highlights don't include a bodyguard on the ice with him, unless you consider Jari Kurri or Esa Tikkanen as "bodyguards."

Ziggy Stardust is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 10:47 PM
  #116
nutbar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,592
vCash: 500
How about the "Canadiens bought the whole Quebec senior league so they could get Jean Beliveau" myth? That's an enduring one.

nutbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 10:56 PM
  #117
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Osgood is better than many HHOF goalies and deserves to be inducted. The claim "but he played on a stacked team!" can be used against a great many of those in the Hall already who do not have the 401 career RS wins or 74 playoff wins (or anywhere NEAR that) Osgood does. And that's even when you consider things such as schedule length.
And who are these HHOF goaltenders he's superior to? Unless my eyes deceive me Osgood didn't even make this forum's top-40 goaltender's list. Given the high quality of the people that worked on that project my guess is you're in a VERY distinct minority on that view.

Ps. Wins are a TEAM stat, not something you hold up to prove the superiority of an individual player.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 11:02 PM
  #118
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
And who are these HHOF goaltenders he's superior to? Unless my eyes deceive me Osgood didn't even make this forum's top-40 goaltender's list. Given the high quality of the people that worked on that project my guess is you're in a VERY distinct minority on that view.
Given the fact that Tim Thomas was getting votes, it makes me wonder about the consistency of the criteria being used to judge a goaltender.

In Game 6 of the 2011 Finals, Boston completely destroyed Vancouver. Vancouver had 18 scoring chances (series high for the losing team). But none until Boston had a 2-0 lead, and 17 of them came after Boston was up 4-0. 5-2 was the final.

Vancouver only had 8 scoring chances in game 4. Only 12 in the final game - and despite having last change, Vigneault failed to keep his top line away from Chara and Seidenberg.

Quote:
Wins are a TEAM stat, not something you hold up to prove the superiority of an individual player.
Was it a team stat when Osgood finished second in the league in save percentage? Oh, right, it was because Osgood (unlike any other goalie in history) benefited from a perfect defense that never allowed a shot on goal that could have *gasp* actually gone in. All goals ever scored against Osgood were because he made a mistake and let in weak, easy shots.

Did you know that the 1998 Stanley Cup winning goal was scored by Martin Lapointe on a set and ready Olaf Kolzig from about 60 feet away, totally unscreened? Of course you didn't, Osgood and Dan Cloutier are the only goalies who have ever given up long goals like that.

Wins are a team stat - to a degree. Were wins a team stat in 1995-96 when Chris Osgood went 39-6-5 and Mike Vernon went 21-7-2? Osgood played the tougher teams and had a much better record. Where's the "team"-ness of it there?


Last edited by pdd: 05-07-2013 at 11:28 PM.
pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 11:09 PM
  #119
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Was it a team stat when Osgood finished second in the league in save percentage? Oh, right, it was because Osgood (unlike any other goalie in history) benefited from a perfect defense that never allowed a shot on goal that could have *gasp* actually gone in. All goals ever scored against Osgood were because he made a mistake and let in weak, easy shots.

Did you know that the 1998 Stanley Cup winning goal was scored by Martin Lapointe on a set and ready Olaf Kolzig from about 60 feet away, totally unscreened? Of course you didn't, Osgood and Dan Cloutier are the only goalies who have ever given up long goals like that.
Yeah, and a scrub goalie like Elliot led the league in save percentage last year. If your Mark IV eyeballs can't tell the difference between a truly great goalie and one who's the product of a system then I don't know what to tell you.

And BTW I'm still awaiting the names of the HHOF goaltenders Osgood is supposed to be superior to.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 11:22 PM
  #120
TheDevilMadeMe
Mod Supervisor
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
And who are these HHOF goaltenders he's superior to? Unless my eyes deceive me Osgood didn't even make this forum's top-40 goaltender's list. Given the high quality of the people that worked on that project my guess is you're in a VERY distinct minority on that view.

Ps. Wins are a TEAM stat, not something you hold up to prove the superiority of an individual player.
Maybe Cheevers, I don't know, he and Osgood can't be that far apart, right?

Of course, comparing Osgood to the guy who is widely considered the worst NHL-era inductee into the HHOF isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2013, 11:29 PM
  #121
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Maybe Cheevers, I don't know, he and Osgood can't be that far apart, right?

Of course, comparing Osgood to the guy who is widely considered the worst NHL-era inductee into the HHOF isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.
Cheevers is probably the closest I can think of. I noticed he didn't make the top-40 list either

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 01:30 AM
  #122
Reaganomics
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Uppsala
Country: Sweden
Posts: 309
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JesusBouillon View Post
Karlsson is good defensively.

Although only Sens fans believe that.
Karlsson was playing very good defense at the beginning of the year before he got injured. Since coming back from injury he hasnt quite reached that level.

And I'm not a Sens fan.

Reaganomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 03:14 AM
  #123
HabsByTheBay
Registered User
 
HabsByTheBay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: London
Country: United States
Posts: 1,212
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by angry pirate View Post
How about the Myth surround the Habs supposed territorial rights over french players and it creating the Habs dynasties?





http://www.habseyesontheprize.com/20...e-canadiens-fr
Just to add more context...

Montreal swept up most - but not all: Provonost, Pilote, Ratelle, Gilbert, etc. - good players from Quebec not because they had some shady advantage in the rules, but because they were better poised, richer and smarter than other clubs.

I'm sure they had more francophone scouts than the rest of the Original Six combined, making it much easier to sign some kid from a family that doesn't speak English.

Montreal was the biggest, richest market for hockey for many of the glory years (and when it wasn't it was the second richest behind Toronto, who were tripping themselves up at the first hurdle). The Habs had the money to sign whoever they wanted to.

They also understood youth development better than any other team, understood the draft before any other team, and had Hall of Fame general managers from 1940-1978. Before 1940 they were terrible and in danger of folding, and after Pollock retired in 1978 they fell down to the rest of the pack.

HabsByTheBay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 06:32 AM
  #124
Sentinel
Registered User
 
Sentinel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,798
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
And Osgood's 1998 Wings weren't so stacked, were they? The #4 defenseman was Anders Eriksson, in his rookie season.

And the rest of the team counts for nothing. LOL.

You are an interesting case. I am probably as big of a Red Wings fan as you, and we often argue on the same side, but honestly you do our case more harm than good with glaring holes all over your argument.

Sentinel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 07:20 AM
  #125
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 13,322
vCash: 500
Phil Wimmer and Others

Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsByTheBay View Post
Just to add more context...

Montreal swept up most - but not all: Provonost, Pilote, Ratelle, Gilbert, etc. - good players from Quebec not because they had some shady advantage in the rules, but because they were better poised, richer and smarter than other clubs.

I'm sure they had more francophone scouts than the rest of the Original Six combined, making it much easier to sign some kid from a family that doesn't speak English.

Montreal was the biggest, richest market for hockey for many of the glory years (and when it wasn't it was the second richest behind Toronto, who were tripping themselves up at the first hurdle). The Habs had the money to sign whoever they wanted to.

They also understood youth development better than any other team, understood the draft before any other team, and had Hall of Fame general managers from 1940-1978. Before 1940 they were terrible and in danger of folding, and after Pollock retired in 1978 they fell down to the rest of the pack.
Virtually all of the Canadiens scouts were English.

The Canadiens had advantages. Phil Wimmer, NDG - Sam Pollock,later executive with the Junior Canadiens, was in charge of hockey at the city of Montreal parks for app 20 years, so everything related to minor hockey in Montreal ran thru him. They also had key people in place in other minor hockey associations in various island suburban cities.This put them first in line on prospects.

PM if you are interested in partial list.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:42 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2016 All Rights Reserved.