Detroit # 1 Fan 2,204 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 If we had won the Cup this season, and Ozzie had won the Conn Smythe, he'd be getting in. Now I seriously doubt it, and since I dont believe any team can go to the finals 3 seasons in a row, I dont think Ozzies going to get another chance. But I've been wrong many times before, I'd love to see him do it next year, and get into the HOF at some point. It'll be tough for him, but I've always been an Ozzie fan and I hope he makes it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coolio Mendez 7 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 (edited) The Wings just traded for basically the best goalie in the WORLD and din't feel like haveing a back-up making $3M per season to ride the bench. at the time of Osgood's departure from the Wings, he was making great money for a Goaltender. PLUS he's always taken less to play here in Detroit. Osgood had the misfortune of playing in the same era as a couple of other Canadian goalies named Roy and Brodeur. Osgood has had comparable numbers to both, much like Yzerman with Gretzky & Lemieux, yet he IS going to the Hall. If Roy or Brodeur were a different generation, we wouldn't be having this debate... See last above See two answers back... Why did the Islanders trade Osgood if he was so valuable? Why did the Blues let Osgood walk? Did Osgood not come back to Detroit as a back up? I'm sure there were plenty of teams who wanted Osgood after his departure from St.Louis.....come on now you think Osgood was offered more than 800k from any other team 4 years ago? The greatest rise to the top! Yzerman represented Canada many times, and had won his fair share of individual awards. Awful comparision. No Vezina Trophies - no Hall of Fame - it's been the primary consideration for goaltenders to be considered since 1985. Every goaltender in the Hockey Hall of Fame who has played in the NHL since Vezina died, has a Vezina Trophy, or a Hart Trophy except Gerry Cheevers...and he he has the 2nd best winning percentage in NHL history. Edited July 27, 2009 by Coolio Mendez Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rage 24 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 HHOF goalies are not put on waivers in their prime! HHOF goalies aren't paid a million bucks! (maybe in the 80's) HHOF goalies play internationally HHOF goalies win individual awards HHOF goalies are PERENNIAL all stars Don't we let guys into the Hall too easily as it is? The other telling stat is the won lost record. The fact that Osgood's teams do better when he's not in net is a very telling sign. Osgood has NEVER won an individual award. The Red Wings won 2 of the 3 Cups (97, 08) with him as the designanted back-up. Had Hasek not faltered in 08, Osgood sits on the bench all playoffs. But Hasek faltered, and Osgood came through. But again, 5 Stanley Cup Finals, Only 2 as the designated starter (98, and 09), and only 3 rings. Roy won 4 Stanley Cups in 5 attempts. Fuhr won 5 Stanley Cups in 6 attempts, Brodeur is 3 for 3, and Billy Smith was 4 for 5. Just another place where Osgood just misses. Again, Osgood is in the same category as Vernon, Richter, Vanbeisbrouck, Barrasso, Burke, and Joseph. A better than average goaltender who played a lot of years and put up some big numbers. But only belongs in the Hall of Very Good. I would really like to see him get in at some point, but man what a GREAT POST!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ComradeWasabi 109 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 The reason Osgood shouldn't be in the HHOF is because his name has never been synonymous with the greatest of his generation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline Report post Posted July 27, 2009 HHOF goalies are not put on waivers in their prime! HHOF goalies aren't paid a million bucks! (maybe in the 80's) Being that only one HOF goalie was in his prime past the 80s, I can't help but laugh at this horrible made-up standard. Bravo. No HOF goalies are put on waivers? How about Tony Esposito? Edward Giacomin? Maybe not a popular thing amongst HOF goalies, but once again, a horrible made-up standard and lie. HHOF goalies play internationally Smith, Giacomin, bet the list could go on and on of goalies who did not play internationally. HHOF goalies win individual awards Osgood won 2 Jennings. Those probably don't count though because of perceptions like yours. It must also be said how many goalies have won the Vezina and/or Jennings and not nearly all of them. In fact, one could only get away with saying "most" due to the same people winning the same trophies over and over. HHOF goalies are PERENNIAL all stars Yet another made-up standard means little given how many times the ASG format has been changed (3 game series' , East vs. West, NA vs. World, etc.). Suckage. Don't we let guys into the Hall too easily as it is? "Maybe in the 80s" The other telling stat is the won lost record. The fact that Osgood's teams do better when he's not in net is a very telling sign. We don't count career GAA, Wins, Shutouts, etc.? Wow, nitpicking stats now to fit an agenda? Figure that. Never seen this before. Osgood has NEVER won an individual award. The Red Wings won 2 of the 3 Cups (97, 08) with him as the designanted back-up. Had Hasek not faltered in 08, Osgood sits on the bench all playoffs. But Hasek faltered, and Osgood came through. But again, 5 Stanley Cup Finals, Only 2 as the designated starter (98, and 09), and only 3 rings. Roy won 4 Stanley Cups in 5 attempts. Fuhr won 5 Stanley Cups in 6 attempts, Brodeur is 3 for 3, and Billy Smith was 4 for 5. Just another place where Osgood just misses. Jennings is an individual award and not designated to a team. It may be the only trophy he's won but there's no litmus test for the HOF regarding any of the s*** you've made up here. "Designated backup" is yet another conniving way of skewing words (just like your stats) to deny Osgood any credit that would be an obvious push for him to get into the Hall. Again, Osgood is in the same category as Vernon, Richter, Vanbeisbrouck, Barrasso, Burke, and Joseph. A better than average goaltender who played a lot of years and put up some big numbers. But only belongs in the Hall of Very Good. Correction, Osgood is above that class, and while borderline HOF-worthy, and not on the same level as Roy or Sawchuk, would certainly have earned it if he were to be inducted. While many here happen to be impressed by someone who can throw out a bunch of stats, it doesn't impress me in the slightest bit, as someone who studies politics and government, I know very well how they are used to bulls*** people. Anyone who analyzes the statistics you've used and even the wording used to discount Osgood for his achievements (in at least one case, robbing him of it entirely for 2008) can see a horrible argument made for why Osgood wouldn't make it into the hall. The only logical reason that I can think of that Osgood would not make it is because of the recent class of goalies and how few they are, but some HOF-worthy goalies (like Hasek) have retired from the NHL or are going to retire so we may get an actual picture of what might be coming for far more objective rationales regarding election to the Hall and what it's voters go by. However, he has enough of a resume of major achievements, individual and team-related, including the Cups, to justify a Hall nomination. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 5,153 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 Being that only one HOF goalie was in his prime past the 80s, I can't help but laugh at this horrible made-up standard. Bravo. No HOF goalies are put on waivers? How about Tony Esposito? Edward Giacomin? Maybe not a popular thing amongst HOF goalies, but once again, a horrible made-up standard and lie. Smith, Giacomin, bet the list could go on and on of goalies who did not play internationally. Osgood won 2 Jennings. Those probably don't count though because of perceptions like yours. It must also be said how many goalies have won the Vezina and/or Jennings and not nearly all of them. In fact, one could only get away with saying "most" due to the same people winning the same trophies over and over. Yet another made-up standard means little given how many times the ASG format has been changed (3 game series' , East vs. West, NA vs. World, etc.). Suckage. "Maybe in the 80s" We don't count career GAA, Wins, Shutouts, etc.? Wow, nitpicking stats now to fit an agenda? Figure that. Never seen this before. Jennings is an individual award and not designated to a team. It may be the only trophy he's won but there's no litmus test for the HOF regarding any of the s*** you've made up here. "Designated backup" is yet another conniving way of skewing words (just like your stats) to deny Osgood any credit that would be an obvious push for him to get into the Hall. Correction, Osgood is above that class, and while borderline HOF-worthy, and not on the same level as Roy or Sawchuk, would certainly have earned it if he were to be inducted. While many here happen to be impressed by someone who can throw out a bunch of stats, it doesn't impress me in the slightest bit, as someone who studies politics and government, I know very well how they are used to bulls*** people. Anyone who analyzes the statistics you've used and even the wording used to discount Osgood for his achievements (in at least one case, robbing him of it entirely for 2008) can see a horrible argument made for why Osgood wouldn't make it into the hall. The only logical reason that I can think of that Osgood would not make it is because of the recent class of goalies and how few they are, but some HOF-worthy goalies (like Hasek) have retired from the NHL or are going to retire so we may get an actual picture of what might be coming for far more objective rationales regarding election to the Hall and what it's voters go by. However, he has enough of a resume of major achievements, individual and team-related, including the Cups, to justify a Hall nomination. and with that, nohing else can be said. Osgood in the rafters and Hall.... period... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 Osgood will flat-out not make it because of an incredible prime where he was winning awards and dominating the league. He could get in, however, simply because of a long and winning career. Mike Gartner and Glenn Anderson never led the league in anything and never won any individual trophies (in fact, Osgood beats them there with a 2nd Team All Star and the Pearsons) but they are there for stringing together a ton of good years together - just like Osgood has - and having great careers - just like Osgood has. Osgood is a consistently good goalie who is money in the playoffs - and was fortunate enough to spend most of his years on a good team and win some Cups as a starter. That could be enough right there. There are few goalies with better playoff stats. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Echolalia 2,961 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 Man that's bold. I see what you did there. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tdinc 45 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 Ozzie has always been class act. and his stats speak for him. He should go in to the hall. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coolio Mendez 7 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 (edited) When was Tony Esposito put on waivers, his rookie year with only 16 games under his belt? Edward Giacomin your talking about a guy who played in the original 6 era, where there were only 6 starting jobs! Smith has a Vezina, Osgood does NOT! Again Giacomin played in the original six era, you do know when Giacomin played their were specific teams who represented Canada right? Bravo Jennings can be an individual award but in Osgood's case it was NOT. Osgood split games evenly with Hasek and Vernon throughtout 96 and 07 year. To give Osgood all the credit is insane. You sound bitter, the best play in the All Star games. Hence the term All Star. Your spewing off for what again? I'll post this again because you seemed to have dodged it the first time. No Vezina Trophies - no Hall of Fame - it's been the primary consideration for goaltenders to be considered since 1985. Every goaltender in the Hockey Hall of Fame who has played in the NHL since Vezina died, has a Vezina Trophy, or a Hart Trophy except Gerry Cheevers...and he he has the 2nd best winning percentage in NHL history. That's a FACT! Who says I'm against Osgood getting in? I'll be rooting for him like your next Wings fan...... but I don't see it happening. Edited July 27, 2009 by Coolio Mendez Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 One nice thing about Osgood's terrible regular season last year is I think it pretty easily puts to rest the whole idea that "anyone's grandma could look good in Detroit as the goaltender". Clearly this is not the case (Hasek also proved that in the 08 playoffs). Osgood has the following: 2 Jennings Trophies 2 All Star Game appearances 1 2nd Team All Star Selection (in a year he was runner-up for the Vezina) He has finished seasons 2, 3, 4, 7, 9 in shutouts 2, 8, 10 in save percentage 1, 2, 3, 6, 10 in goals against average 1, 3, 4, 8, 8, 8 in wins He had a Conn Smythe worthy playoffs in 2008 (better than Cam Ward) and was the odds-on favorite for the Conn Smythe if Detroit had won in 2009. He would be far from the best goalie to ever go into the Hall of Fame, but he wouldn't be the worst either. Osgood compares quite favorable to Grant Fuhr, Billy Smith, Bernie Parent, Gump Worsley, Chuck Rayner, Alec Connell and is better than Gerry Cheevers, Harry Lumley, Hap Holmes and Roy Worters. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GordieSid&Ted Report post Posted July 27, 2009 No, he does NOT belong in the HOF There are three goaltenders who will go in before him Martin Brodeur, Dominik Hasek, and Ed Belfour Lets compare him to his peers. Vezinas Finalist (the award voted on by NHL GMs) 10 Dominik Hasek (6 - 0 - 4) 9 Martin Brodeur (4-3-2) 7 Ed Belfour (2-1-4) 1 Chris Osgood (0-1-0) So, the GMs have NEVER thought that Osgood was the best goaltender, and only ONCE in his career have they felt he was top 3 International Competition (players picked for these tend to hand picked by GMs) Dominik Hasek 1 Olympic Gold Medal (1998) 1 Olympic Bronze Medal (2006) 1 World Championship Gold Medal (1996) 3 World Championship Bronze Medals (1987, 1989, 1990) Represented Czechoslovakia/Czech Republic at 5 Canada Cup/World Cups, 5 Olympics, and 6 World Championships Martin Brodeur 1 Olympic Gold Medal (2002) 1 Canada Cup/World Cup Gold Medal (2004) 1 Canada Cup/World Cup Silver Medal (1996) 2 World Championship Silver Medals (1996, 2005) Ed Belfour 1 Olympic Gold Medal (2002) 2 Canada Cup/World Cup Gold Medals (1991, 2004) Chris Osgood - has never been selected to represent Canada Again, the powers that be have never felt Osgood worthy of International Competition, while these others have represented their countries (and won) numerous times. Total Awards 13 Hasek (Pearson (98, 98), Hart (97, 98), Vezina (94, 95, 97, 98, 99, 01), Jennings (94, 01, 08) 9 Brodeur (Calder (94), Vezina (03, 04, 07, 08), Jennings (97, 98, 03, 04) 8 Belfour (Calder (91), Vezina (91, 93), Jennings (91, 93, 95, 99), Crozier (00)) 2 Osgood (Jennings (96, 08) Note - Osgood has NEVER won an individual award. 40 Win Seasons 7 Brodeur 2 Belfour 1 Hasek 0 Osgood Again - on the bottom 30 Win Seasons 12 Brodeur 9 Belfour 7 Hasek 6 Osgood Again - on the bottom Shutout Titles 4 Brodeur 4 Hasek 4 Belfour 0 Osgood I'm sensing a pattern here Career Post Season All-Star Teams 7 Brodeur (03, 04, 07 1st Team, 97, 98, 06, 08 2nd Team) 6 Hasek (94, 95, 97, 98, 99, 01 1st Team) 3 Belfour (91, 93 1st Team, 95 2nd Team) 1 Osgood (96 2nd Team) The pattern continues Career Shutouts 101 Brodeur (1 every 9.89 games) 81 Hasek (1 every 9.07 games) 76 Belfour (1 every 12.67 games) 49 Osgood (1 every 14.49 games) Career Wins 557 Brodeur 484 Belfour 389 Osgood 389 Hasek Career Save Percentage 0.922 Hasek 0.914 Brodeur 0.9064 Belfour 0.9058 Osgood The Comparisons - Winning Percentage Teams that Brodeur has played on have a winning percentage of 0.617 (699-400-179). Brodeur is at 0.631 (557-299-128). So, Brodeur's teams have played worse when he's not playing (142-101-51 or 0.569). A difference of +0.062 Teams that Hasek played on had a winning percentage of 0.594 (670-429-179). Hasek is at 0.617 (389-223-95). So, Hasek's teams have played worse when he's not playing (281-206-84 or 0.566). A difference of +0.051 Teams that Belfour played on had a winning percentage of 0.573 (681-481-200). Belfour is at 0.589 (484-320-125). So, Belfour's teams have played worse when he's not playing (197-161-75 or 0.542). A difference of +0.047 Teams that Osgood has played on have a winning percentage of 0.646 (693-344-161). Osgood is at 0.636 (389-204-89). So, Osgood's teams play better when he's not in net (304-140-72 or 0.659) So, out of these 4, 3 of them made their teams better - 1 of them (Osgood) did not. Also, if Stanley Cups got you into the Hall of Fame - Andy Moog and Michel Larocque would be there! (and Larocque has several Vezinas) When players are selected for ther Hall of Fame, they are compared against their peers. Osgood fails against his peers. QFT. And also quoted b/c apparently LeftWinger didn't see it. Care to comment on any of this info? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 (edited) QFT. And also quoted b/c apparently LeftWinger didn't see it. Care to comment on any of this info? I find it ironic you are one of the biggest proponents of Ciccarelli getting into the HHoF around here, but apparently not Osgood. They are essentially the same player at different positions... though Osgood has Cups and a runner-up Vezina. There is no question Hasek (best ever), Roy, Brodeur and Belfour deserve to be in before Osgood - but Osgood could very well get in based on his career. Edited July 27, 2009 by egroen Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GordieSid&Ted Report post Posted July 27, 2009 I find it ironic you are one of the biggest proponents of Ciccarelli getting into the HHoF around here, but apparently not Osgood. They are essentially the same player at different positions... though Osgood has Cups and a runner-up Vezina. There is no question Hasek (best ever), Roy, Brodeur and Belfour deserve to be in before Osgood - but Osgood could very well get in based on his career. Assumption is the mother of all f*** ups my friend. I happen to believe that Osgood will get in. And there have been enough of these threads over the years that some might recall I am typically a proponent of him getting in. However, that being said.....it doesn't change the fact that compared to his contemporaries, Osgood hasn't shined nearly as bright. Will that keep him out? I doubt it. Frankly, I think he will have a great shot of getting in once he eclipses the 400 wins mark. That, his longevity and the rings will help. But will it be enough? Who knows? They f*** Ciccarelli over year after year and the guy has 600 career goals so I guess anything is possible. Would I vote for Osgood to get in? I don't know. Despite my best efforts to be as objective as possible on a daily basis regarding all things Wings, I think I might be biased enough to vote yes for him. Does he deserve to get in? What's that saying we use for Fedorov jersey retirements. If we have to debate about it, it ain't gonna happen. So WTF, I have no clue if he gets in or not. If he does I will rejoice. If he doesn't, I'll chalk it up as him not being good enough in the eyes of those who count. If I can live with Dino not making it then I won't much shed a tear if Oz doesn't either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 Would I vote for Osgood to get in? I don't know. Despite my best efforts to be as objective as possible on a daily basis regarding all things Wings, I think I might be biased enough to vote yes for him. Does he deserve to get in? What's that saying we use for Fedorov jersey retirements. If we have to debate about it, it ain't gonna happen. So WTF, I have no clue if he gets in or not. If he does I will rejoice. If he doesn't, I'll chalk it up as him not being good enough in the eyes of those who count. If I can live with Dino not making it then I won't much shed a tear if Oz doesn't either. I think Osgood will have a better chance than Ciccarelli -- no character issues + Cups + 2nd Team All Star Osgood also has had a better career than Ciccarelli, whom is ranked #16 all-time in goals and #62 in points (much lower if we adjust for era), while Osgood is #10 all-time in wins. Though to be honest, if I had a vote, I'm not entirely sure I would vote for either of them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GordieSid&Ted Report post Posted July 27, 2009 I think Osgood will have a better chance than Ciccarelli -- no character issues + Cups + 2nd Team All Star Osgood also has had a better career than Ciccarelli, whom is ranked #16 all-time in goals and #62 in points (much lower if we adjust for era), while Osgood is #10 all-time in wins. Though to be honest, if I had a vote, I'm not entirely sure I would vote for either of them. I feel that way too sometimes. Although it's hard to compare a goalie to a skater. What's more impressive? 400 wins or 600 goals? They are very similar with respect to how their careers have gone. Both excellent players. But would we ever deem them to be great? Looking at the folks ahead of them regarding wins/goals: I don't know if Cujo should get in but those win numbers are impressive. Belfour is in, right? He has to get in I would think. Hasek in. Everybody else is already in I think. As far as goals go you know Sakic, Shanny and Jarg are getting in. Kurri is behind Dino and already in. Andreychuk? So basically, 14 of the 16 men who have ever made it to 600 goals are in. Tough IMO to keep out Dave and Dino. That's a serious milestone to reach 600 goals. Same with 400 wins. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline Report post Posted July 27, 2009 (edited) Jarri Kurri was also instrumental in his team winning FIVE cups. Dino helped his teams win 0 cups. There's far more to the HOF than numbers, i.e. career points/goals/assists, especially more than the biased interpretation of them that Coolio Mendez has brought to the table. Edited July 27, 2009 by Shoreline Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheDetroitRedWings 286 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 Who says I'm against Osgood getting in? I'll be rooting for him like your next Wings fan...... but I don't see it happening. Yeah it's called being a realistic and objective non-homer fan. I've only been here a little while. But non-homer Red Wings fans seam to be a minority on these forums. My guess is objective non-homer Red Wings fans are outnumbered 8-1. Some of the people here saying Osgood is elite made me laugh to no end. I've been a Red Wings fan since the early 80's. I bleed Red Wing red. But there is a thing called taking your red colored goggles off and being realistic. Osgood is no where near elite. He's not bad or anything. He's a pretty good goalie who has played for a great organization for the majority of his career. Simple as that. No more, no less. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline Report post Posted July 27, 2009 Yeah it's called being a realistic and objective non-homer fan. I've only been here a little while. But non-homer Red Wings fans seam to be a minority on these forums. My guess is objective non-homer Red Wings fans are outnumbered 8-1. Some of the people here saying Osgood is elite made me laugh to no end. I've been a Red Wings fan since the early 80's. I bleed Red Wing red. But there is a thing called taking your red colored goggles off and being realistic. Osgood is no where near elite. He's not bad or anything. He's a pretty good goalie who has played for a great organization for the majority of his career. Simple as that. No more, no less. Homers and people wearing red colored goggles in the media too, apparently.. looks like you're the only sane one! Or, that might be a bit backwards. http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/dailycouri...l/s_627418.html Osgood quietly on way to Hall of Fame DETROIT — Imagine eight years ago, after Chris Osgood had been banished to the New York Islanders, and long after Mike Vernon and Dominik Hasek had been called in to provide the Red Wings with the kind of championship goaltending they never believed they could regularly get from Osgood, that this question would have been posed: "Hall of Fame?" Three words were offered for consideration to the 36-year-old a day before tonight's Stanley Cup Final begins. He thought for a moment as he clutched a bottle of water. And in much the same way as he accepts a puck flying in on him, he handled the query. "One day," he said, with a nod. "It would be a great honor, maybe something I could look forward to. "It's one of my goals." It was anticipated Osgood might toss back the usual retort to that question: "I'm only concentrating now on winning the Stanley Cup" bromide. But one thing that can be safely said about Osgood is that he is not conventional. The early skepticism about his championship skills; the journeyman tours with the Islanders and St. Louis Blues; the absence of a Vezina Trophy, which is awarded to the one considered by hockey's intelligentsia as the purest practitioner of goaltending skill — none of that has stopped Osgood from wending his way these past 15 seasons toward a likely spot in the Hockey Hall of Fame. "A slam dunk," said Barry Melrose, the ESPN analyst, as he sat with his broadcast partner, Steve Levy, at Friday's media briefing. "No doubt about it. "If you compare his numbers with the other guys, the question is not if he's a Hall of Famer, but why wouldn't he be a Hall of Famer? I can't believe there are people who don't think he is." Red Wings analyst Mickey Redmond agreed with Melrose. "Yes," Redmond said to the question of Osgood's credentials. "He's going to have 400 wins ... he'll be in the top 10 of all time. He's got three Cups, two as a starter, and he's working on a third, obviously. His lifetime numbers, his goals-against (2.47) are very good. And he's never had a losing season anywhere. "Whether it was St. Louis, or the Islanders, or juniors, he's been nothing but a winner." Still up for debate So, why the surprise, if not in some quarters debate, about Osgood's worthiness? In the estimation of pundits, and probably most fans, it is simple. Osgood never has been a dazzler. He never has flashed the savoir-faire or derring-do of the Patrick Roys or Billy Smiths. He has lacked the aura, and certainly the towering skill, of a Ken Dryden. But his longevity also has equipped him to maximize his considerable skills on a team that was just right for him: the Red Wings of the past 15 years. If he wasn't quite in the realm of those superstars (Steve Yzerman, Nick Lidstrom, Brendan Shanahan, Brett Hull, etc.) who were about to deliver to Detroit a string of Cups beginning in 1997, he was poised to deliver sturdy endurance and a gentle, progressive polishing of his innate talents. Not a half-bad recipe for putting one's self into position for a glorious NHL career, or, as it turns out, Hall of Fame candidacy. Levy spoke yesterday about the way in which Osgood earlier in his career would lull anyone into thinking of him as, well, mediocre. "He doesn't strike you as a dominant goaltender of his time," Levy said. "But he's very good at what he does. And all he does is win championships." http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/playoffs/200...&id=4176419 DETROIT -- Perhaps one day, about five years after Chris Osgood is done with his NHL career, we'll all wake up and realize he was a better goalie than anyone ever gave him credit for. Perhaps it will be the day he goes into the Hockey Hall of Fame with 400-plus wins and a few Stanley Cup rings. But, until then, it seems Osgood will have to live with the fact no matter what he does, people will second-guess him. "It doesn't really bother me to be honest," Osgood told ESPN.com during an interview over lunch Monday. "I know I have respect from the guys in the room and they know what I can do." Yes, Osgood's biggest fans are the 20 players making millions of dollars wearing the Red Wings' jersey, who can't figure out why most of the outside world continues to doubt the 36-year-old netminder. He has 389 career regular-season wins, tied for 10th all time in the NHL with Dominik Hasek. Next up on the list is none other than Grant Fuhr (403), the goalie Osgood idolized growing up in Edmonton. Impressive company. "Yeah, I don't know why that is, that's always been a subject in here," said six-time Norris Trophy winner Nicklas Lidstrom. "He's always been the strong mental goalie -- when it's needed, he comes up with a big save or a big game. If he has a bad game, he'll bounce back with another strong effort. We've seen that numerous times in the playoffs, not just this year, but other years as well. "I don't know why he doesn't get the respect he should be getting." Wings general manager Ken Holland has a few theories on that. "First of all, there's a perception that we can put anybody in our net," Holland told ESPN.com. "We've always had high-profile talent. And through the years, we've always outshot the other team, so our goalie is in a position to only be responsible for the loss; he's not responsible for the win. I think Dominik Hasek had a hard time when he first got here, I think Curtis Joseph had a hard time with it, because we win because of our skaters and we lose because of our goalie. It's the perception." That's a perception that has dogged Osgood. When this team wins, Osgood gets zero credit. When they lose? He gets singled out. "By no means are we going to win solely because of me nor lose solely because of me," said Osgood. "Why we're so successful is that we don't rely on one player. Whether it's Hank, Pav, Nick, Raffy, Mule, anybody -- we're a team. That's actually why we've won our last two games of the playoffs because our role players have played well. "So I never feel that pressure of having to go out and win a game. I've got to be solid and make the saves at the right time." Theory No. 2 from Holland: selective memory. "People remember Jamie Langenbrunner's long goal from center ice against Ozzie," said Holland, recalling the forward's overtime goal in Game 5 of the 1998 West finals against the Dallas Stars. "But it depends on what you want to remember. Somebody wants to remember that goal; I remember that Ozzie shut them out in Game 6 2-0 [to advance]. I remember that he bounced back when there was lots of pressure and lots of people waiting for him to wilt. "And one year in the playoffs, Al MacInnis scored from center ice and sent the game into overtime," added Holland. "What I remember is that we won in overtime. People want to remember that goal, but I remember that we won in overtime. Depends what you want to remember. At the end of the day, when Chris Osgood is challenged, that's when he challenges the best. When there's a bad goal or a bad game, he's going to give you your best performance." Btw, I've been a Red Wing fan since 1776. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HenryMalredo 2 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 Osgood will only get in the Hall based on longevity (aka the Mike Gartner way). He is going to retire with great numbers, but he is not better than most of the goalies he will surpass, just as Mike Gartner had scored more goals than better players. The best HHoF comparisons to Ozzie are Fuhr and Smith, two mediocre regular season goalies who weren't exactly workhorses, but Osgood, despite having greatly improved his playoff reputation in the last few years, doesn't have quite the big-game rep as those two. There's quite a few goalies who aren't in the Hall that compare similar or better to Osgood: Vachon, Hextall, Vernon, Barasso. Remember, a lot of HHoF selections are base on perception, so remember how often, rightly or wrongly, Osgood has been listed as Detroit's weak link at the beginning of each season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 5,153 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 QFT. And also quoted b/c apparently LeftWinger didn't see it. Care to comment on any of this info? Yes, I did see that, and yes I commented on it, GM's aren't theonly ones who vote players in to the Hall, WRITERS do, and the majority of the writers around the league all think he will one day be in. Also, the reason Osgood never won Vezina or Hart is the same reason Yzerman never won a Hart. He had the unfortunate luck to play in the same era as ROy, Hasek & Brodeur. (Yzerman with Gretzky, Lemieux.) Same goes for Osgood not represesenting Canada, he played with those guys and there are only 2 spots to fill on a team, not 21. SO if you are the 5th best goalie in the league, odds are you are not going to get to fill those two slots unless 3 folks are injured. Yzerman never won a Hart, Richard, Calder, Byng, etc... He won Selke and Pearson and 1 Conn Smyth. He is getting into the Hall because he leads nearly all statistcal positions for the Wings, he was a tremendous leader and a constiment winner. Oh, wait, am I still talking about Yzerman because that ounds a lot like Osgood's career, and he will lead the Wings in nearly EVERY goaltending catagory PLUS finish 5th ALL TIME in wins. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 5,153 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 Osgood will only get in the Hall based on longevity (aka the Mike Gartner way). He is going to retire with great numbers, but he is not better than most of the goalies he will surpass, just as Mike Gartner had scored more goals than better players. The best HHoF comparisons to Ozzie are Fuhr and Smith, two mediocre regular season goalies who weren't exactly workhorses, but Osgood, despite having greatly improved his playoff reputation in the last few years, doesn't have quite the big-game rep as those two. There's quite a few goalies who aren't in the Hall that compare similar or better to Osgood: Vachon, Hextall, Vernon, Barasso. Remember, a lot of HHoF selections are base on perception, so remember how often, rightly or wrongly, Osgood has been listed as Detroit's weak link at the beginning of each season. Only to be the strongest in the playoffs, isn't that crazy? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline Report post Posted July 27, 2009 Osgood will only get in the Hall based on longevity (aka the Mike Gartner way). He is going to retire with great numbers, but he is not better than most of the goalies he will surpass, just as Mike Gartner had scored more goals than better players. The best HHoF comparisons to Ozzie are Fuhr and Smith, two mediocre regular season goalies who weren't exactly workhorses, but Osgood, despite having greatly improved his playoff reputation in the last few years, doesn't have quite the big-game rep as those two. There's quite a few goalies who aren't in the Hall that compare similar or better to Osgood: Vachon, Hextall, Vernon, Barasso. Remember, a lot of HHoF selections are base on perception, so remember how often, rightly or wrongly, Osgood has been listed as Detroit's weak link at the beginning of each season. Agreed on most of this. Ozzie's longevity and championships will be key to him getting in. If the Wings had won one more game in June 2009 Ozzie was by all rights a shoe-in. Now, depending on the class when he retires, it could be maybe a 2nd or 3rd ballot in unless the HOF has a rather light year. Another thing that's rather unambiguous is, regarding the last sentence, is Ozzie is highly underrated. He's not extremely flashy nor "big game" like Roy or Brodeur who will steal many games. Hell, guys like Ron Francis were never flashy, just played a lot, and won a lot. Some of it has to do with being on a good team, most of it has to do with being cool-headed. He's usually making the saves he needs to make and as an article pointed out that I quoted, the bashers will mostly remember a few bad shots he let in rather than the countless he stopped, plenty of which were game savers. Elite goalies also bring their game to a new level come playoff time, which is exactly the case with Oz. I would respect and most certainly understand why if the voters don't put Ozzie in, since I would know where they're coming from, I just hope they don't downplay his assets and career the same way some people who like to call those who support Ozzie to the HOF "Homers" do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coolio Mendez 7 Report post Posted July 27, 2009 (edited) Only to be the strongest in the playoffs, isn't that crazy? Chris is a playoff goalie, not a regular season one? I don't think he has ever had a losing season in the REGULAR season. He has stunk for the best part of the season, then again, he has NEVER been THE KEY component to a playoff run.....solid but not spectacular. No Conn Smythes... To say he is a playoff goalie, not a regular season one is kind of wrong. Osgood in the reg. season 389-204-66 Osgood in the playoffs is 74-49 ( 0-1 in the AHL and 16-14 in the WHL) So, what is "playoff goalie" about? His GAA gets better in the playoffs but Detroit goalies have that reputation. Edited July 27, 2009 by Coolio Mendez Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline Report post Posted July 27, 2009 Chris is a playoff goalie, not a regular season one? I don't think he has ever had a losing season in the REGULAR season. He has stunk for the best part of the season, then again, he has NEVER been THE KEY component to a playoff run.....solid but not spectacular. No Conn Smythes... To say he is a playoff goalie, not a regular season one is kind of wrong. Osgood in the reg. season 389-204-66 Osgood in the playoffs is 74-49 ( 0-1 in the AHL and 16-14 in the WHL) So, what is "playoff goalie" about? His GAA gets better in the playoffs but Detroit goalies have that reputation. That is true. Maybe with an exception of Legace and possibly a few others, the Wings have had a system that produces great defense. That ends the only truthful part you've mentioned. As this last season's regular season would show, even with s***ty stats, and Ozzie not playing up to par, he still won, while the defense was playing mediocre. In the playoffs the defense was subpar, Ozzie was above par. If one wants to **** to GAA, with the Islanders and Blues, one could not say Ozzie was worse in the playoffs. With the Blues he was significantly better come playoffs -- the rest of their team just wasn't. There's plenty of consistency there which points to Ozzie stepping up come playoff time, not just with the Wings, which is why he's been notorious for it. If the Wings won the cup this year, Ozzie is holding the Conn Smythe. He was still the best Red Wings player and easily in the top 3 of all NHL players during the postseason. There's just no logical basis for the suggestion that Oz isn't key or clutch in the playoffs. He's not Brodeur or Roy, everyone knows this much, but he is quite essential to the cup runs the Wings have had with him. Of course, you're doing a stand-up job of discounting his every accomplishment. You point to people praising Ozzie as homers and wearing red sunglasses, whereas the agenda on your plate is as flaming as Lambert. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites