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
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
05-09-2013, 08:24 AM
  #126
HabsByTheBay
Registered User
 
HabsByTheBay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: London
Country: United States
Posts: 1,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
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 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.
That might still mean my statement was true, considering the ability of francophone hockey people to get noticed in other O6 organizations at that time! Anglophone Montrealers would also probably have at least some ability to fake it in French that scouts from Ontario wouldn't have.

PM me the list, would love to have it.

HabsByTheBay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 09:00 AM
  #127
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentinel View Post

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.
Who is the #4 defenseman on some other Cup winners in the pre-lockout period?

Richard Matvichuk. Slava Fetisov. Jiri Fischer. Jon Klemm. Vladimir Malakhov.

Klemm is the only one who comes remotely close to Eriksson's level of play career-wise, and Roy won the Smythe that year. And that was on a team where the top-three were Bourque/Blake/Foote; which is better than Lidstrom/Murphy/Fetisov by a fair bit.

Conclusion: Osgood is unfairly criticized as if he played on a far greater team than contemporary Cup-winning goalies like Belfour, Brodeur or Roy. It's not true. Maybe if Konstantinov hadn't been injured, it would be true. But if that were the case, he would have more Cups (Osgood was Detroit's best player in 99 as of the end of the Anaheim series; his injury is why they were eliminated), and wouldn't be criticized at all.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 09:26 AM
  #128
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 34,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nutbar View Post
How about the "Canadiens bought the whole Quebec senior league so they could get Jean Beliveau" myth? That's an enduring one.
What's the true story behind that one?

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 09:43 AM
  #129
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
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.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Cheevers is probably the closest I can think of. I noticed he didn't make the top-40 list either
Fourteen goaltenders who played in the O6 era are in the HHOF. Four of them (Francis, Giacomin, Parent, Cheevers) aren't really "O6" goalies.

So that's ten goalies from 25 years. Chris Osgood played seventeen seasons from 1993-94 through 2010-11. From 1967-68 through 1985-86 there were seven goalies, with guys like Moog, Vachon, and even Mike Liut probably as worthy as some of those from the era who did get in. So let's look at the best goalies from 1986-87 through 2011-12 (I'd go 90-91 to 2014-15, but it's only 2013):

We have the obvious ones: Hasek, Roy, Belfour, Brodeur.

After that, who are the next-best three-six goalies? You probably have to include Osgood, Joseph, Luongo, Barrasso, and there are arguments for Kolzig and Thomas (among others) to round out the group.

So unless you think the period Osgood played in was hugely devoid of goaltending talent historically, he's certainly as worthy as many guys already in based on peer-to-peer comparison.

As for actual ability, there's a thread about player evolution. His 2008 season/playoff and his 2009 run certainly make an argument for late-career abilities; how many guys do you see have runs like that multiple times who are NOT great goalies? Examples are appreciated.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 09:51 AM
  #130
Hawkman
Moderator
RIP Jean Beliveau
 
Hawkman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
What's the true story behind that one?
It's not a myth. http://www.greatesthockeylegends.com...-beliveau.html

Hawkman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 10:06 AM
  #131
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,479
vCash: 500
Other Scouts and Organizations

Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsByTheBay View Post
That might still mean my statement was true, considering the ability of francophone hockey people to get noticed in other O6 organizations at that time! Anglophone Montrealers would also probably have at least some ability to fake it in French that scouts from Ontario wouldn't have.

PM me the list, would love to have it.
The scouts or hockey people for other teams during the O6 era fell into one of two categories - former players at the NHL or minor league level. Phil Watson who headed the Rangers in Quebec with a long list of contacts, Connie Dion - Detroit and / or Catholic "Brothers" French and English who were coaching the school teams, Latin background so conversant in French, St. Mike's background in many cases, with an extensive hockey network to plug players into.

Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 10:59 AM
  #132
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,479
vCash: 500
Eras

Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Fourteen goaltenders who played in the O6 era are in the HHOF. Four of them (Francis, Giacomin, Parent, Cheevers) aren't really "O6" goalies.

So that's ten goalies from 25 years. Chris Osgood played seventeen seasons from 1993-94 through 2010-11. From 1967-68 through 1985-86 there were seven goalies, with guys like Moog, Vachon, and even Mike Liut probably as worthy as some of those from the era who did get in. So let's look at the best goalies from 1986-87 through 2011-12 (I'd go 90-91 to 2014-15, but it's only 2013):

We have the obvious ones: Hasek, Roy, Belfour, Brodeur.

After that, who are the next-best three-six goalies? You probably have to include Osgood, Joseph, Luongo, Barrasso, and there are arguments for Kolzig and Thomas (among others) to round out the group.

So unless you think the period Osgood played in was hugely devoid of goaltending talent historically, he's certainly as worthy as many guys already in based on peer-to-peer comparison.

As for actual ability, there's a thread about player evolution. His 2008 season/playoff and his 2009 run certainly make an argument for late-career abilities; how many guys do you see have runs like that multiple times who are NOT great goalies? Examples are appreciated.
Your Osgood claim revolves around 400 wins, a number which no pre 70 game regular NHL season ever achieved and the number of HHOF goalies from an era as you define era.

Interesting definition of eras. O6 is 25 years from 1942-43 thru 1966-67. The fourteen/ten goalies - Francis is in as a builder, may be further whittled to as low as seven since Broda, Brimsek, Rayner made their debuts before 1942-43.

1967-68 to 1985-86 is only 17 seasons. Cheevers, Parent and Giacomin have to be included leaving four which would be Dryden, Tony Esposito, Billy Smith, Grant Fuhr,

1986-87 to 2011-12 back to 24 seasons. On the other hand thru 2003-04 would yield 17.6 season allowing for the first NHL lockout.

Now lets account for the start of the 70 game NHL regular season, 1949-50 to 1966-67 or eighteen seasons. This would represent six HHOF goalies since Brimsek, Broda, Durnan, Rayner barely played in the 70 game era.

So at 17, 17.6, 18 seasons per era with the increase in regular season games to 82 levels the rink. Six, seven plus a definite four HHOFers.

Now 400 wins is an arbitrary benchmark. Recent regular season wins(1986-87 to 2003-04 era) are artificially inflated by OT and SO wins. Jacques Plante never had the benefit of converting ties to wins like Chris Osgood did. So Osgood's inflated 401 wins deflates to the high 300s.

Chris Osgood, not a sure fire HHOFer, a possibility depending on how other still active goalies perform.

Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 12:08 PM
  #133
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmm View Post
Beat me to it. Really not sure how anyone thought this was a myth?
Thought it was pretty common knowledge.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 12:44 PM
  #134
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Your Osgood claim revolves around 400 wins, a number which no pre 70 game regular NHL season ever achieved and the number of HHOF goalies from an era as you define era.

Interesting definition of eras. O6 is 25 years from 1942-43 thru 1966-67. The fourteen/ten goalies - Francis is in as a builder, may be further whittled to as low as seven since Broda, Brimsek, Rayner made their debuts before 1942-43.

1967-68 to 1985-86 is only 17 seasons. Cheevers, Parent and Giacomin have to be included leaving four which would be Dryden, Tony Esposito, Billy Smith, Grant Fuhr,

1986-87 to 2011-12 back to 24 seasons. On the other hand thru 2003-04 would yield 17.6 season allowing for the first NHL lockout.

Now lets account for the start of the 70 game NHL regular season, 1949-50 to 1966-67 or eighteen seasons. This would represent six HHOF goalies since Brimsek, Broda, Durnan, Rayner barely played in the 70 game era.

So at 17, 17.6, 18 seasons per era with the increase in regular season games to 82 levels the rink. Six, seven plus a definite four HHOFers.

Now 400 wins is an arbitrary benchmark. Recent regular season wins(1986-87 to 2003-04 era) are artificially inflated by OT and SO wins. Jacques Plante never had the benefit of converting ties to wins like Chris Osgood did. So Osgood's inflated 401 wins deflates to the high 300s.

Chris Osgood, not a sure fire HHOFer, a possibility depending on how other still active goalies perform.
It's not just "400 wins". That's just a "you don't get that number as an average/above average goalie all of your career." point of argument.

And you can whittle it down to six if you like; Osgood is top-six for "his era" guys. There's the argument that Thomas peaked higher. He also didn't play in the NHL until 31 because he wasn't good enough, while Osgood was a top 5-10 goalie through his 20s, a Vezina nominee, All-Star, and Cup champion in the same timeframe that Thomas was playing in Finland, the IHL, and AHL. Kiprusoff couldn't earn a starting job for years, and was called an elite netminder even in years where he was an average starter at best; he had an arguably higher peak but Osgood's advantage in playoff performance makes up for that. As it does against Luongo, and most who would be put against him. It's funny; Osgood is like the Messier of goaltenders, yet the treatment is completely the opposite. Messier gets too much credit and Osgood gets too little.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 02:30 PM
  #135
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 23,124
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Really not sure how anyone thought this was a myth? Thought it was pretty common knowledge.
If it isnt it should be. Heres an interesting site about the Quebec Aces, and if you link into Souvenirs 1 & 2, some fantastic vintage pictures, including one or two beyond hysterical with none other than Punch Imlach in the late 40's as Playing Coach, about a foot smaller than every other player, lookin an awful lot like Larry of the 3 Stooges. Well worth looking up, exploring. Quite the trip.

http://www.simulation8.tripod.com/qu...s/accueil.html

Note; link doesnt work bang-on for some reason. Try Quebec Aces History key words via google....

Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 02:40 PM
  #136
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Fourteen goaltenders who played in the O6 era are in the HHOF. Four of them (Francis, Giacomin, Parent, Cheevers) aren't really "O6" goalies.

So that's ten goalies from 25 years. Chris Osgood played seventeen seasons from 1993-94 through 2010-11. From 1967-68 through 1985-86 there were seven goalies, with guys like Moog, Vachon, and even Mike Liut probably as worthy as some of those from the era who did get in. So let's look at the best goalies from 1986-87 through 2011-12 (I'd go 90-91 to 2014-15, but it's only 2013):

We have the obvious ones: Hasek, Roy, Belfour, Brodeur.

After that, who are the next-best three-six goalies? You probably have to include Osgood, Joseph, Luongo, Barrasso, and there are arguments for Kolzig and Thomas (among others) to round out the group.

So unless you think the period Osgood played in was hugely devoid of goaltending talent historically, he's certainly as worthy as many guys already in based on peer-to-peer comparison.

As for actual ability, there's a thread about player evolution. His 2008 season/playoff and his 2009 run certainly make an argument for late-career abilities; how many guys do you see have runs like that multiple times who are NOT great goalies? Examples are appreciated.
Now, I didn't ask for a plump for bean counting and affirmative action for DPE goalies. I asked which goaltenders in the HHOF are you claiming Osgood is superior to. I want specific names.

"As for actual ability, there's a thread about player evolution." That's basically BS.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 03:14 PM
  #137
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 23,124
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
I asked which goaltenders in the HHOF are you claiming Osgood is superior to. I want specific names.
Well, I wouldnt necessarily say "superior" but I would put him in the same "league" in terms of overall career play & value/category in terms of criteria pursuant to possible induction into the HHOF as Ed Belfour, Tony Esposito, Eddie Giacomin & Glenn Hall of recent vintage quite honestly. And if we go back even further, superior to some who are members. Chris Osgoods like the Rodney Dangerfield of Goaltenders; Cant get no respect and frankly, I think he deserves a fair amount of it.

Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 03:23 PM
  #138
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,479
vCash: 500
Dick Duff

Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Well, I wouldnt necessarily say "superior" but I would put him in the same "league" in terms of overall career play & value/category in terms of criteria pursuant to possible induction into the HHOF as Ed Belfour, Tony Esposito, Eddie Giacomin & Glenn Hall of recent vintage quite honestly. And if we go back even further, superior to some who are members. Chris Osgoods like the Rodney Dangerfield of Goaltenders; Cant get no respect and frankly, I think he deserves a fair amount of it.
Chris Osgood is the Dick Duff of goaltenders. Under appreciated when a team wins.

Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 03:32 PM
  #139
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,479
vCash: 500
True....

Quote:
Originally Posted by nutbar View Post
How about the "Canadiens bought the whole Quebec senior league so they could get Jean Beliveau" myth? That's an enduring one.
As linked by other posters the statement is true. The objective was to convert the QSHL from amateur to professional thereby forcing Jean Beliveau to play for them since the Canadiens owned his professional hockey rights.

What has to be understood is the fact that buying a league does not give you the ownership of the individual franchises or the player assets. Nor does ownership of a league create liability for individual franchise debts.

How the Canadiens managed the league and the various player assets or franchises is another matter.

Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 03:48 PM
  #140
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Now, I didn't ask for a plump for bean counting and affirmative action for DPE goalies. I asked which goaltenders in the HHOF are you claiming Osgood is superior to. I want specific names.

"As for actual ability, there's a thread about player evolution." That's basically BS.
It's not BS; in the 70s and early 80s there was definitely a lack of "NHL caliber" goalies when compared to the skill level of other positions. That's why we see the highlights of goals where they looked like they had no clue what to do, or were just flailing hopelessly at a weak looper. The "skater population" kept up with the number of teams and produced high level talent much better than goalies. It wasn't until the early/mid 90s that goalies caught up in depth of higher-end players and overall technique, largely driven by the addition of Euro goalies. Euro skaters were big, but guys like Hasek, Kolzig, Irbe, Khabibulin, Salo made up a huge percentage of starters given the number of total Euros at the time. And now we have Lundqvist, Rinne, Kiprusoff, Bobrovsky, Niemi, Hiller, Rask, Varlamov, Lehtonen, Markstrom, Backstrom, Nabokov, Bryzgalov, Pavelec. And that increase in goaltending quality relative to skater quality is one major reason for the DPE and lower scoring ever since. But again, there's a thread for that.

To the bolded: In a "historical" sense, or an "actual ability to stop the puck" sense? Because the second list will be larger. It's like Chicago's Al Rollins' 1953-54 season. He went 12-47 with a 3.23, had the worst record and GAA of any goaltender in the league aside from Jean Marois and Jack Gelineau; each played two games for Chicago, going 0-2 with 5.50 and 9.00, respectively. Rollins won the Hart that season and was third in goaltender voting (with Chicago defenseman Bill Gadsby third in defenseman voting), even though statistically he was by far the worst goaltender. If we don't even look at the voting, and just make judgements on stats, we can make the following judgements:

Rollins was a starter, so he was one of the top six to twelve goalies; a total of twelve goalies played that season. Statistically, he was worse than everyone but the two other Chicago goalies. As he was the Chicago starter and started 66 games to the combined 4 of the other Chicago goalies, we can assume it wasn't just a matter of stats. So he was a top-ten goalie in the NHL. He was statistically worse than every other starter, as well as second-year rookie Jacques Plante, who only played 17 games. So that places him behind six goalies. Meaning statistically, he's somewhere between #7 and #10. Four of the other goalies (Bower, Lumley, Plante, Sawchuk) are HHOFers, leaving McNeil and Henry ahead of Rollins statistically without making the Hall.

Also interesting about that season is that Johnny Bower allowed 0.63 fewer GPG, won 17 more games, had below-average offensive support, did not play behind a top-three defenseman as Rollins did, and yet did not receive a single vote for the postseason All-Star team while Rollins finished third for AS and won the Hart.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 03:50 PM
  #141
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Chris Osgood is the Dick Duff of goaltenders. Under appreciated when a team wins.
No, because Duff doesn't deserve to be a HHOFer.

More like Mark Howe; a guy who was quite important to his team's success and was a top player at his position in his prime, but will likely get overlooked for HHOF induction for a while.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 03:53 PM
  #142
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 34,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
It's funny; Osgood is like the Messier of goaltenders, yet the treatment is completely the opposite. Messier gets too much credit and Osgood gets too little.
Osgood gets to be the Messier of goaltenders just as soon as he wins a Hart.


edit: Looking over Osgood's numbers, I noticed something that has never jumped out at me before: after winning the Cup at age 25, he only had one season over .910, compared to four seasons below .900. This during an era when the league average hovered slightly below .910.

Also, his seasons over 60 games are outnumbered by his seasons under 50 games, 7 to 5. And it's not that is the result of playing till some extraordinary age as a backup mentor, seeing as he was splitting time with the likes of Wregget, Legace, Snow and Conklin even when Hasek didn't put him on the shelf.

I'm not an Osgood fan by any means, but even I would have guessed his numbers were a bit better than that. If he didn't have the rings and win total, it would be goofy to even suggest this guy as a HOF candidate.


Last edited by tarheelhockey: 05-09-2013 at 04:12 PM.
tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 04:06 PM
  #143
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
It's not BS; in the 70s and early 80s there was definitely a lack of "NHL caliber" goalies when compared to the skill level of other positions. That's why we see the highlights of goals where they looked like they had no clue what to do, or were just flailing hopelessly at a weak looper. The "skater population" kept up with the number of teams and produced high level talent much better than goalies. It wasn't until the early/mid 90s that goalies caught up in depth of higher-end players and overall technique, largely driven by the addition of Euro goalies. Euro skaters were big, but guys like Hasek, Kolzig, Irbe, Khabibulin, Salo made up a huge percentage of starters given the number of total Euros at the time. And now we have Lundqvist, Rinne, Kiprusoff, Bobrovsky, Niemi, Hiller, Rask, Varlamov, Lehtonen, Markstrom, Backstrom, Nabokov, Bryzgalov, Pavelec. And that increase in goaltending quality relative to skater quality is one major reason for the DPE and lower scoring ever since. But again, there's a thread for that.

To the bolded: In a "historical" sense, or an "actual ability to stop the puck" sense? Because the second list will be larger. It's like Chicago's Al Rollins' 1953-54 season. He went 12-47 with a 3.23, had the worst record and GAA of any goaltender in the league aside from Jean Marois and Jack Gelineau; each played two games for Chicago, going 0-2 with 5.50 and 9.00, respectively. Rollins won the Hart that season and was third in goaltender voting (with Chicago defenseman Bill Gadsby third in defenseman voting), even though statistically he was by far the worst goaltender. If we don't even look at the voting, and just make judgements on stats, we can make the following judgements:

Rollins was a starter, so he was one of the top six to twelve goalies; a total of twelve goalies played that season. Statistically, he was worse than everyone but the two other Chicago goalies. As he was the Chicago starter and started 66 games to the combined 4 of the other Chicago goalies, we can assume it wasn't just a matter of stats. So he was a top-ten goalie in the NHL. He was statistically worse than every other starter, as well as second-year rookie Jacques Plante, who only played 17 games. So that places him behind six goalies. Meaning statistically, he's somewhere between #7 and #10. Four of the other goalies (Bower, Lumley, Plante, Sawchuk) are HHOFers, leaving McNeil and Henry ahead of Rollins statistically without making the Hall.

Also interesting about that season is that Johnny Bower allowed 0.63 fewer GPG, won 17 more games, had below-average offensive support, did not play behind a top-three defenseman as Rollins did, and yet did not receive a single vote for the postseason All-Star team while Rollins finished third for AS and won the Hart.
I do believe the idea that '90s goaltenders were superior to prior generations has been debunked many times by some of the people posting in this thread. Do I really need to start bumping the threads? Sorry, but the DPE was a result of a number of factors none of which has anything to do with "they finally learned how to play goal". Trust me, you aren't going to win any "every generation of player is better than the last" arguments in the History section.

Hell, I think the number one hockey myth is the idea that nobody knew how to play goal in the '80s.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 04:08 PM
  #144
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Well, I wouldnt necessarily say "superior" but I would put him in the same "league" in terms of overall career play & value/category in terms of criteria pursuant to possible induction into the HHOF as Ed Belfour, Tony Esposito, Eddie Giacomin & Glenn Hall of recent vintage quite honestly. And if we go back even further, superior to some who are members. Chris Osgoods like the Rodney Dangerfield of Goaltenders; Cant get no respect and frankly, I think he deserves a fair amount of it.
The only reason anybody gives a rip about Osgood is because he played for the Red Wings. If he had spent his career in Calgary you wouldn't be hearing a peep about "poor unappreciated Osgood".

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 04:18 PM
  #145
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 23,124
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
No, because Duff doesn't deserve to be a HHOFer.
Utter rubbish. He absolutely belongs to be in the HHOF. A student & professor of the game, foolishly traded to the Rangers by Imlach, revitalized career when traded again to Montreal. Dicky Duff was born to be a Maple Leaf & throughout his tenure with the club was a perennial All Star, Stanley Cup Hero: Winner. Additionally, his contributions to the development of hockey at the amateur level with his camps & clinics' paved the way for the explosion of same throughout Ontario & elsewhere from the late 60's on. Dick Duff earned his place in the HHOF eva. Deserves to be there. One Hell of a smart & crafty player. Prodigy as a Junior, with the Leafs, and a valuable member of the Habs thereafter.

Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 04:28 PM
  #146
Evincar
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Evincar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,436
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Osgood gets to be the Messier of goaltenders just as soon as he wins a Hart.


edit: Looking over Osgood's numbers, I noticed something that has never jumped out at me before: after winning the Cup at age 25, he only had one season over .910, compared to four seasons below .900. This during an era when the league average hovered slightly below .910.

Also, his seasons over 60 games are outnumbered by his seasons under 50 games, 7 to 5. And it's not that is the result of playing till some extraordinary age as a backup mentor, seeing as he was splitting time with the likes of Wregget, Legace, Snow and Conklin even when Hasek didn't put him on the shelf.

I'm not an Osgood fan by any means, but even I would have guessed his numbers were a bit better than that. If he didn't have the rings and win total, it would be goofy to even suggest this guy as a HOF candidate.
Or the Vezina he never won. He was a finalist in 95-96 just because he was the starting goalie for a 62 win team among other factors.

Evincar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 04:43 PM
  #147
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 23,124
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
The only reason anybody gives a rip about Osgood is because he played for the Red Wings. If he had spent his career in Calgary you wouldn't be hearing a peep about "poor unappreciated Osgood".
I rather doubt that SP. I consider myself a bit of an expert on goaltenders, a connoisseur if you will, and though prone to "lapses" from time-time positionally in playing initially a hybrid style, then re-inventing his game later in his career (and that right there took some guts, mental toughness), he was solid & could be spectacular when pushed. He was aggressive, a fighter, thought the position, wide range of save selections, had his angles down pat which resulted in economy of movement (rather than "sensational", effective, got the job done), paced himself throughout a game, didnt freak out. Communicated with his defence & forwards effectively, quick reaction time. Good sight. Great vision. Mark IV Eyeballs.

Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 05:28 PM
  #148
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Litework View Post
Or the Vezina he never won. He was a finalist in 95-96 just because he was the starting goalie for a 62 win team among other factors.
I don't care how much of a stat wins are. A guy who goes 39-6-5 absolutely deserves to be a Vezina finalist at minimum; especially when his backup (who finished fourth in Vezina voting the prior year and would win the Smythe the following season) goes 21-7-2. Say what you want about Osgood, but at the end of the day he was a winner. It wasn't the team; he had exactly one losing season in his career, and it was literally the worst season of his career (and he was 37 at the time).

Osgood won 32 games in 2001-02 with the New York Islanders (team total 42); a team that hadn't won 32+ in total since RON HEXTALL was in net (1993-94). Osgood was traded to make room (both roster and salary) for Rick DiPietro. And the Isles managed to win 32+ games a few times (with DiPietro hitting a career high of 32, incidentally) before Ricky DP turned into Ricky DL. But this season's 20 ROW (pace for 34.17) was the first time that the team as a whole surpassed Osgood's 32 win number without the shootout, and that's only if you pro-rate it to 82 games.

So of the eighteen seasons of Islanders hockey since 1994, Osgood's 32 wins individually is a superior total to what the other 17 TEAMS accomplished. He was the team's MVP and dragged them kicking and screaming into the playoffs, where he posted a .956 sv% in the first three games (the Islanders scored 1 goal in the first 2 games, then exploded for 6 in game 3 when they decided to forego what little defense they had been playing). If the Isles had been able to score 1-2 goals per 60 minutes in those first three games, they're in round 2. Instead, the team broke down and started taking bad penalties and giving up too many good chances, while not getting enough good shots on Joseph.

Osgood won 30 games in his next healthy season - starting for St. Louis. The Blues had a -7 goal differential that season, and Osgood was in net for 31 of the team's 39 wins.

Yet it's claimed that Osgood is a "system goalie".

I'd say that's a pretty big myth. And the fact that he was able to go to a couple pretty bad teams and do very well, combined with his extended career of "simply winning" is more important than a guy like Luongo or Joseph who spent years on a bad team posting nice numbers but didn't win anything and is as much to blame as anyone for the lack of success. Osgood has tons of playoff success, and was instrumental in such. People downplay his importance, but there's a reason he was the first guy to get the Cup after Konstantinov in 1998. People downplay his 2008 and 2009 runs, but he could have had back-to-back Smythes those years and it would have been just as legit as the actual winners.

In conclusion,

Myth: Chris Osgood is an overrated product of his team. Any above-average goalie could have done what he did.

Reality: Chris Osgood was a top-notch goalie in his prime, was arguably the best goalie in the world at one point, had multiple elite playoff runs, and was a key player on a "modern dynasty". He is a) HHOF material, and b) should have a banner hanging from the Joe.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 05:30 PM
  #149
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
I rather doubt that SP. I consider myself a bit of an expert on goaltenders, a connoisseur if you will, and though prone to "lapses" from time-time positionally in playing initially a hybrid style, then re-inventing his game later in his career (and that right there took some guts, mental toughness), he was solid & could be spectacular when pushed. He was aggressive, a fighter, thought the position, wide range of save selections, had his angles down pat which resulted in economy of movement (rather than "sensational", effective, got the job done), paced himself throughout a game, didnt freak out. Communicated with his defence & forwards effectively, quick reaction time. Good sight. Great vision. Mark IV Eyeballs.
You forgot "one of the best puckhandling goaltenders of the 90s generation"

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2013, 05:32 PM
  #150
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,261
vCash: 500
I think that this >>>>>

Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Osgood gets to be the Messier of goaltenders just as soon as he wins a Hart.


edit: Looking over Osgood's numbers, I noticed something that has never jumped out at me before: after winning the Cup at age 25, he only had one season over .910, compared to four seasons below .900. This during an era when the league average hovered slightly below .910.

Also, his seasons over 60 games are outnumbered by his seasons under 50 games, 7 to 5. And it's not that is the result of playing till some extraordinary age as a backup mentor, seeing as he was splitting time with the likes of Wregget, Legace, Snow and Conklin even when Hasek didn't put him on the shelf.

I'm not an Osgood fan by any means, but even I would have guessed his numbers were a bit better than that. If he didn't have the rings and win total, it would be goofy to even suggest this guy as a HOF candidate.
pretty much answers this >>>>>

Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
I don't care how much of a stat wins are. A guy who goes 39-6-5 absolutely deserves to be a Vezina finalist at minimum; especially when his backup (who finished fourth in Vezina voting the prior year and would win the Smythe the following season) goes 21-7-2. Say what you want about Osgood, but at the end of the day he was a winner. It wasn't the team; he had exactly one losing season in his career, and it was literally the worst season of his career (and he was 37 at the time).

Osgood won 32 games in 2001-02 with the New York Islanders (team total 42); a team that hadn't won 32+ in total since RON HEXTALL was in net (1993-94). Osgood was traded to make room (both roster and salary) for Rick DiPietro. And the Isles managed to win 32+ games a few times (with DiPietro hitting a career high of 32, incidentally) before Ricky DP turned into Ricky DL. But this season's 20 ROW (pace for 34.17) was the first time that the team as a whole surpassed Osgood's 32 win number without the shootout, and that's only if you pro-rate it to 82 games.

So of the eighteen seasons of Islanders hockey since 1994, Osgood's 32 wins individually is a superior total to what the other 17 TEAMS accomplished. He was the team's MVP and dragged them kicking and screaming into the playoffs, where he posted a .956 sv% in the first three games (the Islanders scored 1 goal in the first 2 games, then exploded for 6 in game 3 when they decided to forego what little defense they had been playing). If the Isles had been able to score 1-2 goals per 60 minutes in those first three games, they're in round 2. Instead, the team broke down and started taking bad penalties and giving up too many good chances, while not getting enough good shots on Joseph.

Osgood won 30 games in his next healthy season - starting for St. Louis. The Blues had a -7 goal differential that season, and Osgood was in net for 31 of the team's 39 wins.

Yet it's claimed that Osgood is a "system goalie".

I'd say that's a pretty big myth. And the fact that he was able to go to a couple pretty bad teams and do very well, combined with his extended career of "simply winning" is more important than a guy like Luongo or Joseph who spent years on a bad team posting nice numbers but didn't win anything and is as much to blame as anyone for the lack of success. Osgood has tons of playoff success, and was instrumental in such. People downplay his importance, but there's a reason he was the first guy to get the Cup after Konstantinov in 1998. People downplay his 2008 and 2009 runs, but he could have had back-to-back Smythes those years and it would have been just as legit as the actual winners.

In conclusion,

Myth: Chris Osgood is an overrated product of his team. Any above-average goalie could have done what he did.

Reality: Chris Osgood was a top-notch goalie in his prime, was arguably the best goalie in the world at one point, had multiple elite playoff runs, and was a key player on a "modern dynasty". He is a) HHOF material, and b) should have a banner hanging from the Joe.

Morgoth Bauglir 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 11:39 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.