HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Osgood's Career

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-08-2004, 08:22 PM
  #26
Jovavic
Lose to CBJ?
 
Jovavic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ClosedDoorMeeting
Country: Qatar
Posts: 10,706
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Jovavic
Quote:
Originally Posted by X8oD
center ice goal in OT?
Followed by a 3-0 shutout the next game?

Whatever brainfart Ozzie had, he's always gone out the next period, the next game and corrected it. He's able to put the crappy goals behind him and continue on.

Of the three Wings Cups, Ozzie easily had the worse of the three teams. They won that Cup for Vladdie and on will alone. Then, I think, the next season MacInnis breaks his glovehand on a shot, the Wings trade for Ranford, and the rest is history.

Jovavic is offline  
Old
01-08-2004, 08:33 PM
  #27
Stephen
Registered User
 
Stephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 31,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Love
Osgood is not a Hall of Famer. Hall of Famers don't get exposed in waiver drafts (no matter WHAT the extenuating circumstance is)
Terry Sawchuk? Grant Fuhr?

I don't think Osgood is a HOF goalie. I don't even think he's a top ten goalie, but throughout his career, he has been a solid keeper for some of the greatest teams ever assembled. His career accomplishments are a little inflated as a result. The waiver draft business has nothing to do with Osgood as a goalie so much as his value to the Wings organization as their number one. Under normal circumstances, he wouldn't have been exposed.

Stephen is offline  
Old
01-08-2004, 10:20 PM
  #28
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
 
John Flyers Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 22,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kickinghorse
The HOF is reserved for the great not the above average or good...

Unfortunately that isn't so anymore. No longer just reserved for the great (Gillies, Mullen .....)

John Flyers Fan is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 04:09 AM
  #29
Dr Love
Registered User
 
Dr Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Location, Location!
Posts: 20,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by explosivethinman
I'm not sure I follow your "he was replaced after winning the cup" theory. Osgood had a few more starts than Vernon in the regular season, then Vernon was the playoff goalie for the first cup. Osgood was the main goalie through regular and post season the following year and was the starter the year after that. Unless my memory is completely shot.
That's my mistake, I was thinking that he was the goalie in 97 when in fact he was the goalie in 98. It still doesn't change the fact he's not a HOFer.

Dr Love is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 04:11 AM
  #30
Dr Love
Registered User
 
Dr Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Location, Location!
Posts: 20,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen
Terry Sawchuk? Grant Fuhr?
Were they exposed in a waiver draft at age 29? No they were not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen
The waiver draft business has nothing to do with Osgood as a goalie so much as his value to the Wings organization as their number one. Under normal circumstances, he wouldn't have been exposed.
It absolutely does. My point is if Chris Osgood is a Hall of Famer, then the Wings would have gotten rid of Legace and not Osgood.

Dr Love is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 04:29 AM
  #31
woody
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 491
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winger98
Ozzy's had a good career so far, and has put up some impressive numbers, but for no extended period of time has he been anywhere close to dominant. He's always just been good or, at best, really good. I really like Ozzy, but I don't consider him HOF material.
I agree with you 100%

His career reminds me alot like Andy Moog. Good goalie, good numbers and played on very good teams but not Hall of fame player.

woody is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 04:31 AM
  #32
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Love
It absolutely does. My point is if Chris Osgood is a Hall of Famer, then the Wings would have gotten rid of Legace and not Osgood.
If you were to ignore every other factor in the situation, then you might have a point.

Osgood was waived because Hasek is better and because $4M is too much to pay a backup.

Also, Scotty Bowman said publicly that they acquired Osgood to prevent him from going to the Blues, not because of Osgood's play.

degroat* is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 04:55 AM
  #33
Dr Love
Registered User
 
Dr Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Location, Location!
Posts: 20,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
If you were to ignore every other factor in the situation, then you might have a point.

Osgood was waived because Hasek is better and because $4M is too much to pay a backup.

Also, Scotty Bowman said publicly that they acquired Osgood to prevent him from going to the Blues, not because of Osgood's play.
Let's just assume for a moment that Osgood is a HOF talent...

In the first place, if he were that good, would the Wings have traded for Hasek? But more to my point, wouldn't they have kept Osgood and let Legace go, regardless of money? No Hall of Fame player that is in good faith with their team, and not in the twilight of their career, gets cut loose for nothing. That is my point.

Dr Love is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 05:03 AM
  #34
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
First of all, there's no such thing as HOF talent. Like it or not, admittance to the HOF is based on numbers. When it is all said and done, Osgood will be approaching 500 wins*.

#1: Yes, if he was that good the Wings would have traded for Hasek. As I said above and you conveniently ignored, the Wings acquired Hasek to keep him out of St. Louis, but because of poor play by Osgood. Also, Hasek is one of the top 5 goaltenders of all time.

#2: No, they wouldn't have kept a $4M backup goaltender. Use some common sense.

#3: He was cut loose for nothing because of Holland's inability not because of Osgood's.

* That's assuming 30 wins per season for the next 6 seasons.

degroat* is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 05:12 AM
  #35
Dr Love
Registered User
 
Dr Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Location, Location!
Posts: 20,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
First of all, there's no such thing as HOF talent. Like it or not, admittance to the HOF is based on numbers. When it is all said and done, Osgood will be approaching 500 wins*.
I disagree. It is about numbers, but it's also about talent. There are plenty of guys that aren't in their sport's hall of fames that have the numbers but aren't percieved to have the eliteness that is needed. Bert Blyleven, Jim Rice for example. Of course, there are some that are in soley because of the numbers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
#1: Yes, if he was that good the Wings would have traded for Hasek. As I said above and you conveniently ignored, the Wings acquired Hasek to keep him out of St. Louis, but because of poor play by Osgood. Also, Hasek is one of the top 5 goaltenders of all time.
I didn't ignore it. You said "Osgood was waived because Hasek is better and because $4M is too much to pay a backup. Also, Scotty Bowman said publicly that they acquired Osgood to prevent him from going to the Blues, not because of Osgood's play." It was a typo that I now see since you said it again, but the first time it appeared to make no sense. But if he were a HOFer--and to be a HOF you have to be elite--then he would have been an elite goalie. And if he was/is an elite goalie, then you can't say for sure if they would have aquired Hasek.

Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
#2: No, they wouldn't have kept a $4M backup goaltender. Use some common sense.
If he was that good, they would have either kept him, or traded him. But they didn't. They tried to trade him, but they couldn't. Another reason he's not a HOFer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
#3: He was cut loose for nothing because of Holland's inability not because of Osgood's.
Fact remains he was cut loose.

Dr Love is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 05:18 AM
  #36
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
I'm wasting my time here. There is simply no logic behind your statements.

Hall of Fame voters dont look back to see if a player was waived.

End of story.

degroat* is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 05:19 AM
  #37
Dr Love
Registered User
 
Dr Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Location, Location!
Posts: 20,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
I'm wasting my time here. There is simply no logic behind your statements.

Hall of Fame voters dont look back to see if a player was waived.

End of story.
No, they look back at their careers, and Osgood's is not a Hall of Fame career so far. Plenty of logic behind that statement. You've missed the point on a number of my statements.

Dr Love is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 05:37 AM
  #38
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
#1. Not a single person here said Osgood is a HOFer now.

#2. If you just don't think he's good enought to warrant being in the HOF, then say it. This waiver nonsense is irrelevent.

degroat* is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 05:45 AM
  #39
Dr Love
Registered User
 
Dr Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Location, Location!
Posts: 20,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
#1. Not a single person here said Osgood is a HOFer now.
And what should we go off of? What he may or may not do? To this point he is not a HOFer. The question was asked will he make it. So far, no.

Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
#2. If you just don't think he's good enought to warrant being in the HOF, then say it. This waiver nonsense is irrelevent.
I don't think he is good enough, and I gave my reasons. You chose to argue them and I further backed my reasons. Don't chastise me for having an opinion and giving reasons for it.

Dr Love is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 06:26 AM
  #40
Habsaku
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 5,554
vCash: 500
Don't you have to be a top player in your era to be a HOfamer? This is getting ridiculous, the guy isn't even a top ten goalie in this league, if he goes to the HOF, then it'll be even worse then it is right now. Gillis in the HOF is ridiculous enough, lets not add to the stupidity. The HOF should be for the very best only, not the "above" average.


Last edited by Habsaku: 01-09-2004 at 02:48 PM.
Habsaku is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 06:54 AM
  #41
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
 
Motown Beatdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indianapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,553
vCash: 450
Osgood was waived because Glenn Sather tried to get Detroit to eat a healthy sum of his salary at the last minute. Terms to a trade to the Rangers were all but done. Then Slats wanted Detroit to add cash. Holland said no seeking another deal that didn't happen. If Osgood was making 1 million instead of 4, chances are he would have been brought back to Detroit.

I'm also gonna go on record in saying the difference between the 2001-2002 cup winning team and the 2000-20001 that lost to the Kings has more to do about better defence and health than Hasek/Osgood. In 2000-2001 Chelios was playing with a bum knee. Larry Murphy and Todd Gill were roaming the blue line vs the Kings. Shanahan and Yzerman both missed games due to injury. In the cup year everyone was healthy, they added more scoring (Hull, Robitalle and a rookie named Datsyuk) A healthy Chris Chelios (norris runner up) and a young emerging Jiri Fischer.

As for as throphies, Ozzie has won the jennings. And was runner up to Jim Carey in 1996 for the Vezina. And IMO didn't win because he played for Detroit. Because his numners were cleary better than what Carey posted.

To the question is Osgood a HOF'er? I dont know just yet. If he has another 3-4 years, post over 400 wins and 35-40 shutouts he could be in. All of those are within reach IMO. Even though it seems like Osgood has been in the NHL forever. He's only 31 years old.

Motown Beatdown is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 10:19 AM
  #42
A Good Flying Bird*
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
I'm guessing that the reason this discussion is going on is THIS ARTICLE ON OSGOOD and I must say that I find it quite amusing that you didn't include the link since the writer shows some numbers that hurt your argument.



The most important factoid in this article is that he's only 30 years old. Most people don't realize this. That is the main reason I think that he will end up being a HOFer.
Osgood's stats are probably the most misleading stats of any player in the NHL today.
I say that as a Wings fan who suffered through his terriblly average goaltending.
I wanted to like Osgood. I remember thinking he was going to be a great goalie. I remember arguing with Avalanche fans, comparing Ozzie's great numbers to a young Patrick Roy's numbers ... but in the end, I knew the stats were a product of Detroit's stifling defense.

In the last three years, Ozzie has lost some terrible series. He was up 2-0 on Colorado, and lost.
He was up 3-1 on LA (and by three goals in game 5 in the third period) and lost.
He was up 3-1 last year, and lost.
Pathetic.

Yeah, those teams collapsed. Ozzie doesn't get all the blame. But damn, a good goalie with three chances to close out a series finds a way to get ONE more win.

A Good Flying Bird* is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 10:21 AM
  #43
A Good Flying Bird*
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
No matter what anyone says, you're going to tell us all how Osgood just rode the coattails of the team in front of him.

Go through what a Blues fan has gone through the past 4-5 years with a great team with poor goaltending and you'll learn to appreciate what Osgood did for the Red Wings.

Or, more accurately, watch your great regular season team fold like a deck of cards as Ozzie chokes in the playoffs again, and you'll appreciate what Ozzie did for the Red Wings.

A Good Flying Bird* is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 10:22 AM
  #44
A Good Flying Bird*
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kickinghorse
I think Osgoods career could be closely compared to Mike Vernons...Both good goalies, 2 cups and great careers... But HOF ? I hope not.... The HOF is reserved for the great not the above average or good...

There is no way to quantify what I am about to say, so it's completely opinion based on watching games, interviews etc.
Vernon was a fierce competitor.
Ozzie seems to melt under pressure.

A Good Flying Bird* is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 10:24 AM
  #45
A Good Flying Bird*
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by X8oD
correct

His last season with Detroit, he lost his starting job to Legace half way through the season. But Detroit went with Expirience in the play-offs. They proceded to get stomped on by LA. And Osgood had the audacity to call his teamates out in the media and wonder if they really had what it takes to win.

For 4 seasons Red wings players fielded questions about Osgood and his many gaffes in the play-offs [center ice goals, soft goals]. The first chance Osgood had, he attacked his teamates. When he did that, many realized he was gone. The final nail in his coffin is the rumor that Jeremy Roenick was with in minutes of Signing with Detroit [he confirmed that part of the rumor himself] but asked if Detroit was planning on doing anything about thier goaltending. When they said no, He signed with Philly [roenick got permission to talk to teams early, media in detroit figured it was a forgone conclusion he was going to sign with Detroit] I was just shocked that they had a chance to replace him with Hasek.

but, his last season in detroit was a disaster. Then he was waived, and the Osgood era was over.

Ozzie's comments were maddening when you consider how often his teammates were careful to say nice things about him despite terrible play.
The word around Detroit was that he was more interested uin Drinking and hanging out with girls than he was on improving his game

A Good Flying Bird* is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 10:30 AM
  #46
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newsguyone
Or, more accurately, watch your great regular season team fold like a deck of cards as Ozzie chokes in the playoffs again, and you'll appreciate what <s>Ozzie did for the Red Wings</s> the Red Wings did for Ozzie.


If you're going to be an ass and take an unnecessary cheapshot at the Blues, at least do it accurately because what you said made no sense at all.

degroat* is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 11:00 AM
  #47
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,093
vCash: 500
Not a chance at making the Hall of Fame in my books.

I like Osgood. I've got him listed among my top ten goalies in the NHL this season. I think he's been underrated over the years because of a few soft goals in the playoffs during his time in Detroit. But I've never seen him as a top five goaltender, or a goalie that can carry a team through a playoff round.

Osgood's been fairly consistent in being good, and well above average at some points, but he's never been an elite player and I think that's what matters when determining whether a player is Hall of Fame worthy.

Of course, there are lots of players in the Hall these days that aren't deserving in my mind, and the stats do look good for Osgood, so if he continues with strong stats he might very well make it. But that doesn't mean he's worthy.

On the whole, I think it's tough to guage a goaltender based on stats. Osgood might have similar numbers to Brodeur, but they're clearly in a different class. When it comes down to it, GAA, save percentage, and wins are just as influenced by a team as they are by a goaltender.

Mike8 is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 11:16 AM
  #48
OldTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OldTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 306
vCash: 500
Osgood will not make the HOF in my opinion.

He is a solid goalie. Sure his numbers are impressive but when playing on the Red Wings, a team that probably had 15 - 25 losses each year he was there, he's going to put up great numbers.

Osgood is the Ron Hextall of his era. Except Hextall was fun to watch.

OldTimeHockey is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 11:19 AM
  #49
OldTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OldTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan
Unfortunately that isn't so anymore. No longer just reserved for the great (Gillies, Mullen .....)
Gillies won 4 stanley cups. Mullen had 1063 points in 1062 games. Both deserving in my opinion.

OldTimeHockey is offline  
Old
01-09-2004, 12:16 PM
  #50
Adityase
Registered User
 
Adityase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Lincoln, NE
Posts: 1,257
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Adityase
Quote:
Originally Posted by X8oD
center ice goal in OT?

Center ice goals happen. It wasn't in OT, but it happened to Brodeur in another high pressure situation - the Stanley Cup Finals - a few months back.

Adityase is offline  
Closed Thread

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 10:36 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.