Osgood hangs 'em up
- Thread starter Omallley
- Start date
maplesyrup
New member
I've argued this before but there is a real chance he get to the HOF though it would clearly be on a lot of guy's backs.
bustaheims
Well-known member
Osgood is an interesting case. His win total is impressive and he has 3 Stanley Cup rings, so, there will be people touting him as a HHOF candidate, but, his other numbers just aren't all that impressive. A career .905 Sv% is rather pedestrian for the era he played in, so is his career GAA of 2.49. I mean, they're good numbers, but that's about it. He's been very successful for being a really rather ordinary goalie.
Leafaholic99
New member
Sure, his stats aren't like Roy/Brodeur/Hasek, but you can't deny that during the time he spent in the NHL, he was one of the top goalies, especially in the playoffs.
Congrats a great career Osgood!
Congrats a great career Osgood!
bustaheims
Well-known member
Leafaholic99 said:
I can very easily deny that. In fact, that's exactly what I'm doing. He was one of most successful goalies, but at no point would I ever have considered him one of the top goalies. He had a couple pretty good playoff runs behind some incredibly talented rosters, but, I'm not sure there was ever a series were you could walk away saying he won it for the Red Wings. Like I said before, a very good career for a very ordinary goalie.
maplesyrup
New member
Good enough to keep bring back and have success with but ultimately, never quite good enough that you wern't looking for something else while he was there. Chris Osgood - the McRib of NHL goalies.
ZBBM
Well-known member
Where does 401 wins rank on the alltime list? 10?
He's in. He has to be. To deny him the HOF means giving more weight to completely subjective judgments about how much the Wings' success was due to him and how much to the rest of the roster than to the only stat that really matters: the W. Since the goalie is the most important position on any team, in Osgood's case you can put up all the arguments you want, but at bottom it's indefensible to privilege a particular opinion (which I happen to share, BTW) over his W-L record. He won the games, he won the rings. He's in.
He's in. He has to be. To deny him the HOF means giving more weight to completely subjective judgments about how much the Wings' success was due to him and how much to the rest of the roster than to the only stat that really matters: the W. Since the goalie is the most important position on any team, in Osgood's case you can put up all the arguments you want, but at bottom it's indefensible to privilege a particular opinion (which I happen to share, BTW) over his W-L record. He won the games, he won the rings. He's in.
Busta Reims said:
ditto
I think his poor seasons away from the Wings (Isles, Blues) help to underscore that some.
I also think the Detroit feeling the need to bring in goalies like Vernon, Hasek & Cujo also helps make the point that they did not feel he was one of the top goalies in the league during his career.
Only one second team All Star nomination and only winning the Jennings with Hasek & Vernon doesn't help his cause either.
If I had to choose four goalies between Cujo, Vernon, Barrasso, Richter or Osgood, Osgood would be the odd man out without any hesitation. All of those guys would require some debate before going to the Hall of Fame. Naturally, his career would also be behind Roy, Belfour & Hasek.
If one wanted to go back in time, I'd argue someone like Rogatien Vachon was a better goalie.
Kin
Active member
Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:
No, I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. That's saying that nothing matters, not save percentage, not GAA, not end of year awards or all-star selections or actually trying to examine his impact on the teams he played on(Osgood did not lead his non-Wings teams to much success and the Wings had/have success without him) compared to a ridiculously flawed statistic like wins.
Kin
Active member
I think that probably the best argument against Chris Osgood making the HOF probably comes when you stack him up with Mike Vernon.
Osgood:
Won no significant individual awards
Won 401 games
Won 2 cups as a starting goalie
Played in two all-star games
Vernon:
Won a Conn Smythe
Won 385 games
Won 2 cups as a starting goalie
Played in five all-star games
Vernon has been eligible for 6 years. Vernon, I don't think, is a very serious candidate. Neither guy will go.
Osgood:
Won no significant individual awards
Won 401 games
Won 2 cups as a starting goalie
Played in two all-star games
Vernon:
Won a Conn Smythe
Won 385 games
Won 2 cups as a starting goalie
Played in five all-star games
Vernon has been eligible for 6 years. Vernon, I don't think, is a very serious candidate. Neither guy will go.
maplesyrup
New member
Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:
Yeah, that was kind of an anomoly I think. Furthermore, its the Hockey HOF, not the save% HOF and stats while obviously important, just aren't the end-all-be-all as far as selection goes. It was really a long, solid career for Osgood even if he played for great teams.
maplesyrup
New member
Saint Nik said:
That's fair. At the same time however, I wouldn't be terribly upset if either guy got in.
Kin
Active member
Barrasso's another guy with a better resume:
Won Vezina/Calder
Won 2 cups
Won 369 games
3 end of year all-star teams
Also eligible for 5 years, also not getting in. I think, to their credit, the selection committee has been pretty good about stating pretty emphatically that being pretty good for many years is not enough for the Hall of Fame. It's hard to imagine anything that would devalue it more.
Won Vezina/Calder
Won 2 cups
Won 369 games
3 end of year all-star teams
Also eligible for 5 years, also not getting in. I think, to their credit, the selection committee has been pretty good about stating pretty emphatically that being pretty good for many years is not enough for the Hall of Fame. It's hard to imagine anything that would devalue it more.