Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

HOF Stats


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 WingZNut13

WingZNut13

    2nd Line Sniper

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,497 posts

Posted 30 December 2010 - 05:28 PM

http://www.mlive.com...ian_offers.html

I'm sure everyone here agrees Ozzie is worth of the HOF. For any on here that might disagree or have questions, Innis makes a very good case for Ozzie.
What kind of color is red? Red is a warning. A declaration. A color that says I'm ready to do what it takes. Red is focused and Driven because red doesn't like second place. So what Kind of color is red? Our kind" - The Red Wing Army

#2 Stolberg

Stolberg

    you call that blowing?!

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,249 posts

Posted 30 December 2010 - 05:32 PM

well now i'm totally convinced

Edited by Stolberg, 30 December 2010 - 05:33 PM.



#3 Joey v3.4

Joey v3.4

    Stoned

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 191 posts

Posted 30 December 2010 - 05:46 PM

well now i'm totally convinced


While there is criteria that determines HOF entry, a lot of HOF entries are based exactly on reports like this.

Does Ozzie deserve HOF? Well, I say, he deserves to be recognized for his years in the sport, and compared to some HOF inductee's, which is all this article really compared, then yes, he deserves to be in the hall of fame.

But it gets more complex than just looking at a few "Favorable" stats, as this article presents. You also have to consider the negatives, not just the accomplishments. And you have to consider the scope of the game that the player was playing in.

It's a good article, but it's very biased.

I think Osgood SHOULD be HOF material, if you compare him to other HOF inductee's. Fuhr made it. Osgood should surely make it. Based on comparison.

That's the dark side of the HOF. Year by year they make exceptions, and soon you have a number of people inducted that actually perform below, the people that follow them. So when the people that follow them do better, the thought is "Well, clearly, Hall of Fame material".

Find whatever stats you desire, Osgood didn't accomplish what Sawchuck, or even Roy accomplished. On that account, he isn't the caliber of player that those guys where, so if that is what you think should be inducted into the hall of fame, no, Osgood would not be included.

But, they've inducted guys like Fuhr, and in doing so it lowers the overall standards. Not to imply Fuhr wasn't good, but Hall of Fame?

In my opinion, the HOF should have stricter rules. Because right now the way that it is, you could make a case for almost ANY career goaltender to make the cut.

Osgood, is VERY borderline. But I base that on HOFers that were greats. Not the random inductee's, who were "Above average", yet made it anyway.

Osgood has had an "Above average" career. I personally do not think it was a HOF career, but that's based on my opinion of what the HOF should be. Compared to some other goalies in the HOF, then yes he'd likely make it.

Then again, when Osgood makes it, ten years from now, someone will pick out a stat like "Look Osgood made it with 400 wins! Our guy has 401! HOF!"

Our expectations seem to go up, but our standards seem to drop.

Edited by Joey v3.4, 30 December 2010 - 05:47 PM.

And Boom goes the Dynamite.

#4 pockets

pockets

    Pockets Smash

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 263 posts
  • Location:So Cal

Posted 30 December 2010 - 06:15 PM

i think he's in maybe not first ballot, but he's in.

I saw a guy compare his career to Dave Anderychuk.

1. A lot of ppl like to point out that Osgood wasn't a Top 5 goalie during his prime, Dave wasn't considered a Top 5 forward.

2. Some people say a lack of individuals awards should keep Chris out, Dave didn't have any either.

In the end one's a goalie and one's a forward, but if you look at their careers they had quite a bit in common.

1. Both were average to above average at their position almost their entire careers.

2. Both had long careers

3. Both lead teams to Cups

4. Both were good in the post-season. (Chris has a bit of an edge here though)

#5 egroen

egroen

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Gold Booster
  • 4,619 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 30 December 2010 - 06:44 PM

I always get uncomfortable when the case for a player getting into the HHoF ultimately boils down to picking the absolute weakest inductions and then arguing said player is better than them. Wins should not be the only measure of a great goalie.

The bar for goalies is much higher than it is for forwards, so Osgood is going to have a considerable wait on his hands, and there are currently a fair amount of goalies waiting in line before him. I think he will eventually get in, but I am more in favor of the committee tightening their selections versus loosening them.
Red Kelly #4 and Larry Aurie #6 belong in the rafters!!!

"For my game, I don't need to score the goal," Konstantinov once explained. "I need someone to start thinking about me and forgetting about scoring goals."

#6 pjgj13

pjgj13

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 558 posts
  • Location:Fraser, MI

Posted 30 December 2010 - 09:04 PM

He may not be a 1st ballot HOFer, but he should get in within 3 years. If he would have been the starter the last 2 years he could have nearly 450 W's.

His number should be in the rafters as well!!

#7 Joey v3.4

Joey v3.4

    Stoned

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 191 posts

Posted 30 December 2010 - 09:23 PM

I don't know if I hinted this well in my first post, but I kind of think the HOF is becoming a joke.

Currently, the HOF is filled with names that even knowledgable hockey fans don't know. (I don't care if you're the best fan in the world, unless you're rainman, you will not remember everyone). As it continues to expand, and allow players, for odds and ends reasons, it will become just more and more obscure, and meaningless.

To me, Hall of Famers are the guys you randomly look up youtube videos of when you're hammered. I'm sure half the people who read this thread have at one point youtubed a Gretzky video, and sure as s*** an Yzerman video.

When you search "Datsyuk" on Youtube, and it says he has 400,000,000 hits, to me that should tell you something.

Edited by Joey v3.4, 30 December 2010 - 09:28 PM.

And Boom goes the Dynamite.

#8 KonstantAdvisor

KonstantAdvisor

    Top Prospect

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 52 posts

Posted 30 December 2010 - 10:10 PM

I think Osgood SHOULD be HOF material, if you compare him to other HOF inductee's. Fuhr made it. Osgood should surely make it. Based on comparison.

That's the dark side of the HOF.

When a goaltender stops goals but the team loses, the goaltender gets traded even though the problem with the team is scoring. Either the goalie wins Vezinas, retires in obscurity, or they look for a team that can play in front of them.

Since good teams usually already have at least average goaltending and the coaches aren't jizzing about stats every day, I can see how, for some fans, the HoF is their last, best chance to get their favorite player, "the respect he deserves!"

Find whatever stats you desire, Osgood didn't accomplish what Sawchuck, or even Roy accomplished. On that account, he isn't the caliber of player that those guys where

Osgood has a better SO/game average in the playoffs than Roy, Belfour or Dryden. He's the equal of Hasek and Joseph and in the same neighborhood as Jaques Plante by those numbers. You're basically saying Detroit could have hired a mop and broomstick to do the job because the team had a NYR-size salary.

Not to imply Fuhr wasn't good, but Hall of Fame?

When a goaltender is runner-up for the Hart Trophy to Wayne Gretzky, considering that it would pass over Messier, Kurri and whoever else was also on the ice that season, doesn't it give you some perspective about what the team valued vs what your stat sheet tells you? Have you honestly watched the games Fuhr played when he wasn't in St. Louis?

In my opinion, the HOF should have stricter rules.
Osgood, is VERY borderline.
Osgood has had an "Above average" career. I personally do not think it was a HOF career,
when Osgood makes it, ten years from now, someone will pick out a stat like "Look Osgood made it with 400 wins! Our guy has 401! HOF!"
Our expectations seem to go up, but our standards seem to drop.

Osgood has been couched as inferior to goaltenders with higher salaries and better SV% his whole career. The HoF can sit on its collective thumb and spin if they can't admit Osgood is among the best in history. I know there are questions about #14, #91, #16 ever having jerseys hung from the rafters simply because of the circumstance of careers, but I know 2 out of 3 have a lock on the HoF. I think #30 should hang from the rafters and I don't have the least hesitation putting that out there.

If Osgood is reaching retirement age and wins a Stanley Cup backing up Howard, it will be nothing new as far as ammunition for critics to claim he's not the best.

#9 eva unit zero

eva unit zero

    Save the Princess...Save the World

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,734 posts

Posted 30 December 2010 - 10:50 PM

I always get uncomfortable when the case for a player getting into the HHoF ultimately boils down to picking the absolute weakest inductions and then arguing said player is better than them. Wins should not be the only measure of a great goalie.

The bar for goalies is much higher than it is for forwards, so Osgood is going to have a considerable wait on his hands, and there are currently a fair amount of goalies waiting in line before him. I think he will eventually get in, but I am more in favor of the committee tightening their selections versus loosening them.


There are 35 goalies in the Hall. 16 of them are pre-Original 6 goalies. That leaves 19 goalies over a span of about 55 years. Osgood is one of the five best goalies of his era; two are already in, another just became eligible, and the last is still playing. There are other goaltenders who were very good who can make arguments for the Hall who have not been inducted, such as Tom Barrasso, Andy Moog, and John Vanbiesbrouck, but Osgood has a higher claim to the Hall than any of them.
"I've never seen a warlock do that without his magic."
"I once devoured a monk's soul. It tasted like chocolate."

#10 Shady Ultima

Shady Ultima

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 584 posts

Posted 30 December 2010 - 11:27 PM

I think, in the past 20 years, you have

Roy
Belfour
Brodeur
Hasek
Osgood
Joseph

As probably the best. I may be missing some, but those are the goalies I can think of off the top of my head. Roy, and Hasek are in, Belfour and Brodeur are locks, and Osgood and Joseph are questionable.

To try to compare the goalies is hard, because of the teams they played on. Roy was incredible on any team, definitely one of the best goalie of all time. Hasek is the same, despite only having won one cup as a starter. He made Buffalo a threat, when they really didn't have much else going for them.

Belfour and Brodeur have both proven that without a SOLID defensive team... they are crap. Belfour won one cup, with a very, very good Dallas team, whereas Brodeur has been absolutely terrible and getting worse since the salary cap came in and NJ's defense disappeared.

Joseph is probably the most under-rated on that list. Most people consider an elite goalie to win cups. But Joseph played on some of the worst teams in his career, and was amazing. I'm not a Toronto fan, but he was the only thing going for them in their 2002 run, and he was the best player in his Edmonton and St. Louis days. He'll probably end up being looked over, but Joseph was one of the best there was.

Osgood is an odd one, possibly ranked lower than Joseph on many people's lists. Despite putting up some great stats over his career, winning 2 cups as a starter, and carrying us in the 08 and 09 playoffs, people never give him the respect he deserves. To be part of the 6 best goalies in 20 years earns HOF in my opinion. Like Joseph, he played for some pretty bad teams, the Isles and the Blues, and he managed to play well. People put him up to his team, but even Lalime could have won a cup as a starter on the 2000 and 2003 NJ teams. They allowed so few shots against that the goalie barely had to even play. They could almost have had an empty net and won. Brodeur has never been amazing without a team in front of him, and still gets called an elite, while Osgood quietly plays as good (or better) in playoffs and never gets the recognition.


There are 35 goalies in the Hall. 16 of them are pre-Original 6 goalies. That leaves 19 goalies over a span of about 55 years. Osgood is one of the five best goalies of his era; two are already in, another just became eligible, and the last is still playing. There are other goaltenders who were very good who can make arguments for the Hall who have not been inducted, such as Tom Barrasso, Andy Moog, and John Vanbiesbrouck, but Osgood has a higher claim to the Hall than any of them.


Just curious, which 5 are you talking, and which two are inducted? I know Roy has been, and I believe Hasek is eligible.

Edited by Shady Ultima, 30 December 2010 - 11:29 PM.


#11 eva unit zero

eva unit zero

    Save the Princess...Save the World

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,734 posts

Posted 30 December 2010 - 11:43 PM

Just curious, which 5 are you talking, and which two are inducted? I know Roy has been, and I believe Hasek is eligible.


For some reason I was counting Hasek as already inducted. I was counting Roy, Hasek, Belfour, Brodeur, and Osgood as the five.
"I've never seen a warlock do that without his magic."
"I once devoured a monk's soul. It tasted like chocolate."

#12 egroen

egroen

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Gold Booster
  • 4,619 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 30 December 2010 - 11:47 PM

There are 35 goalies in the Hall. 16 of them are pre-Original 6 goalies. That leaves 19 goalies over a span of about 55 years. Osgood is one of the five best goalies of his era; two are already in, another just became eligible, and the last is still playing. There are other goaltenders who were very good who can make arguments for the Hall who have not been inducted, such as Tom Barrasso, Andy Moog, and John Vanbiesbrouck, but Osgood has a higher claim to the Hall than any of them.

Vachon is the best goalie not in, IMO.
Red Kelly #4 and Larry Aurie #6 belong in the rafters!!!

"For my game, I don't need to score the goal," Konstantinov once explained. "I need someone to start thinking about me and forgetting about scoring goals."

#13 Buppy

Buppy

    1st Line All-Star

  • Silver Booster
  • 1,981 posts

Posted 31 December 2010 - 12:13 AM

For some reason I was counting Hasek as already inducted. I was counting Roy, Hasek, Belfour, Brodeur, and Osgood as the five.

Joseph I would say is as good or better than Osgood, though that doesn't really diminish Ozzie's credentials.

#14 Buppy

Buppy

    1st Line All-Star

  • Silver Booster
  • 1,981 posts

Posted 31 December 2010 - 12:29 AM

Personally, I think the HOF should recognize consistency and longevity as among the criteria.

There are so few open spots for goalies in the NHL, that just staying good enough to be a starter in this league for 10+ years is a major achievement. Doing so while also maintaining a high level of play (even if not considered one of the very best in any given season) for a Stanley Cup contending team is even moreso. Less than 100 goalies in history have even PLAYED 400 games. Only 10 have played well enough, long enough, and on good enough teams to win that many. Ten.

People mention Ozzie being lucky to play for a great team, and he has been, but at the same time he has had to be good enough to do so. He's been replaced as a starter a few times, which is a fair criticism, but on the flip side...once early in his career, once late, and once by one of the all-time greatest...not that big a knock IMO.

The standard for goalies shouldn't be any higher than for any other player. But for some reason people seem to want to limit goalies to a handful of generational talents like Roy and Hasek. If you did the same for skaters, someone like Yzerman would have been a debateable fringe inductee instead of a first ballot no-brainer. Guys like Shanny and Fedorov who are almost universally expected inductees now would have no chance. I'd say Ozzie is comparable to Shanny and Fedorov, I don't see why there's so much debate. He should be a lock.

Edited by Buppy, 31 December 2010 - 12:30 AM.






Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users