Jump to content

Elevate

Let's talk about Chris Osgood

Recommended Posts

Draper's irrelevant. I just picked him at random because he was a regular on the 1997 team and still on the Wings in 2008. Bigglesworth mentioned Holmstrom. My point is that they were good players on great teams for a long period of time. When you play a position that's fortunately enough to get a counting stat assigned to you for the team winning or losing, then naturally you will move up the leaderboard.

How many team wins has Draper had over his career and where does that rank all time? I have no clue on that but I bet it's fairly high.

Actually, Johnny Mac mentioned Holmstrom, not I.

I agree with the premise of this post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Hasek was pulled last year for Ozzie..we all agree, If Ozzie starts to tank, then pull and put in Ty.. at this point in the playoffs, is there any reason to pull Ozzie?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, Hasek was pulled last year for Ozzie..we all agree, If Ozzie starts to tank, then pull and put in Ty.. at this point in the playoffs, is there any reason to pull Ozzie?

who is talking about pulling ozzie now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
who is talking about pulling ozzie now?

No one, except Hawks fans....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Draper's irrelevant. I just picked him at random because he was a regular on the 1997 team and still on the Wings in 2008. Bigglesworth mentioned Holmstrom. My point is that they were good players on great teams for a long period of time. When you play a position that's fortunately enough to get a counting stat assigned to you for the team winning or losing, then naturally you will move up the leaderboard.

How many team wins has Draper had over his career and where does that rank all time? I have no clue on that but I bet it's fairly high.

For the purposes of your argument, Draper is relevant. He's not top-10 in any meaningful category like Osgood is, so I think you need to pick a different guy to compare Osgood to. Unless you can convince the rest of the hockey world to abandon the idea of goaltender wins and loses you have to take them into consideration.

With respect to the question of how he would have done on a team that never made it to the Cup Finals, now THAT is irrelevant, because he didn't. He owns three rings, two of which he guided the team to, and another which he positioned them for. Lots of guys made their careers in the post-season. Maybe Reggie Jackson is a better comparison: a guy who compiled his HOF stats over a 20+ year career, but who was most known for his post season heroics. Not a perfect comparison by any means -- Jackson was a better player in his sport -- but way better than Draper, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For the purposes of your argument, Draper is relevant. He's not top-10 in any meaningful category like Osgood is, so I think you need to pick a different guy to compare Osgood to. Unless you can convince the rest of the hockey world to abandon the idea of goaltender wins and loses you have to take them into consideration.

With respect to the question of how he would have done on a team that never made it to the Cup Finals, now THAT is irrelevant, because he didn't. He owns three rings, two of which he guided the team to, and another which he positioned them for. Lots of guys made their careers in the post-season. Maybe Reggie Jackson is a better comparison: a guy who compiled his HOF stats over a 20+ year career, but who was most known for his post season heroics. Not a perfect comparison by any means -- Jackson was a better player in his sport -- but way better than Draper, IMO.

which is why i mentioned holmstrom instead of draper. Homer has played on the wings top 2 lines most his career, has a 30 goal season and multiple 20 goal seasons and he has 2 more cups as a starter than ozzie does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
which is why i mentioned holmstrom instead of draper. Homer has played on the wings top 2 lines most his career, has a 30 goal season and multiple 20 goal seasons and he has 2 more cups as a starter than ozzie does.

How many categories Tomas Holmstrom rank in the top 10?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How many categories Tomas Holmstrom rank in the top 10?

how many does osgood rate in that only he can control and is not a team stat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
how many does osgood rate in that only he can control and is not a team stat?

The correct answer is, Tomas Holmstrom does not rank in the top 10 of any any NHL career statistical category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
how many does osgood rate in that only he can control and is not a team stat?

what do you consider to be something he can control? he can't control turnovers in front of the net that is scored. He can't control a breakaway due to bad defense. These things effect overall numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked at Osgood on Wikpedia and he supposedly had the best GGA in the NHL last year with a 2.09 in regular season and 1.55 in playoffs..he also shared the Jennings award with Vernon and Hasek..now you say, he was not the starter, but Osgood did play games those seasons and it is a team sport, so he does get credit..currently ranked 10th in all time wins, not bad...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Osgood#Awards_and_achievements

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I looked at Osgood on Wikpedia and he supposedly had the best GGA in the NHL last year with a 2.09 in regular season and 1.55 in playoffs..he also shared the Jennings award with Vernon and Hasek..now you say, he was not the starter, but Osgood did play games those seasons and it is a team sport, so he does get credit..currently ranked 10th in all time wins, not bad...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Osgood#Awards_and_achievements

Yup - Osgood won a Jennings throphy and was the finalist for the Vezina one time. I am sorry, but that just isn't that impressive in the context of determining if Osgood deserves to be inducted into the NHL Hockey Hall of Fame.

From my point of view, the only reasons this discussion is even taking place is because Osgood has three rings and 370 wins. Those are great numbers. Good for him - it speaks well of his ability. But the fact remains that had he not spent a majority of his career with the Red Wings, it is highly unlikely that he would have those numbers nor would he likely be mentioned as a potential Hall of Fame goaltender. I don't understand how one can ignore that almost certain fact when considering his HoF candidacy.

Chris Osgood has had a tremendous career. I think he is a very good goaltender, and am glad he is Red Wing. They could, and have, done far worse. But very rarely has he even been a top 5 goaltender in the NHL in a season.

In my opinion, the HoF should be reserved for the best players - dominant players - not guys who were pretty good for a long time and coincidentally were part of a dynasty. Because frankly there are other goaltenders who were as good and as long as Osgood, but had the misfortune of playing for lesser teams in the league most years, so they receive little to no support for the HoF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone know his injury status?

Are we even sure it's an injury? I was under the impression he was sitting in a 5-1 against a desperate Blackhawk team running wild.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are we even sure it's an injury? I was under the impression he was sitting in a 5-1 against a desperate Blackhawk team running wild.

Yes, Jimmy Howard was on the bench in the third.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, Jimmy Howard was on the bench in the third.

that doesnt mean he was injured, he could have just had a case of the flu. Or they just wanted him to rest and give Howard some playoff "experience". Being on the bench is different than watching in the locker room for a guy like him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yup - Osgood won a Jennings throphy and was the finalist for the Vezina one time. I am sorry, but that just isn't that impressive in the context of determining if Osgood deserves to be inducted into the NHL Hockey Hall of Fame.

From my point of view, the only reasons this discussion is even taking place is because Osgood has three rings and 370 wins. Those are great numbers. Good for him - it speaks well of his ability. But the fact remains that had he not spent a majority of his career with the Red Wings, it is highly unlikely that he would have those numbers nor would he likely be mentioned as a potential Hall of Fame goaltender. I don't understand how one can ignore that almost certain fact when considering his HoF candidacy.

Chris Osgood has had a tremendous career. I think he is a very good goaltender, and am glad he is Red Wing. They could, and have, done far worse. But very rarely has he even been a top 5 goaltender in the NHL in a season.

In my opinion, the HoF should be reserved for the best players - dominant players - not guys who were pretty good for a long time and coincidentally were part of a dynasty. Because frankly there are other goaltenders who were as good and as long as Osgood, but had the misfortune of playing for lesser teams in the league most years, so they receive little to no support for the HoF.

Well said.

End of subject? Somehow I don't think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course you think it should be the end of the discussion -- you agree with him. Many disagree. Many think his career accomplishments are worthy of the HOF. I think those arguments should be the end of the subject. Yet somehow, I don't think they will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course you think it should be the end of the discussion -- you agree with him. Many disagree. Many think his career accomplishments are worthy of the HOF. I think those arguments should be the end of the subject. Yet somehow, I don't think they will.

Out of curiosity, do you take issue with any of the claims I made, or do we have different views on what it should take to be inducted in the HoF, or both?

Yup - Osgood won a Jennings throphy and was the finalist for the Vezina one time. I am sorry, but that just isn't that impressive in the context of determining if Osgood deserves to be inducted into the NHL Hockey Hall of Fame.

From my point of view, the only reasons this discussion is even taking place is because Osgood has three rings and 370 wins. Those are great numbers. Good for him - it speaks well of his ability. But the fact remains that had he not spent a majority of his career with the Red Wings, it is highly unlikely that he would have those numbers nor would he likely be mentioned as a potential Hall of Fame goaltender. I don't understand how one can ignore that almost certain fact when considering his HoF candidacy.

Chris Osgood has had a tremendous career. I think he is a very good goaltender, and am glad he is Red Wing. They could, and have, done far worse. But very rarely has he even been a top 5 goaltender in the NHL in a season.

In my opinion, the HoF should be reserved for the best players - dominant players - not guys who were pretty good for a long time and coincidentally were part of a dynasty. Because frankly there are other goaltenders who were as good and as long as Osgood, but had the misfortune of playing for lesser teams in the league most years, so they receive little to no support for the HoF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think lots of players reach the HOF based on the contributions of the players they are surrounded by and by fortune of spending their careers on really good teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some one used an analogy of a pitcher winning something like 260 games....truth is that the comparison should be a pitcher who is in the top ten all time in wins....a pitcher who was top ten all time in Wins would breeze into the HOF....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
some one used an analogy of a pitcher winning something like 260 games....truth is that the comparison should be a pitcher who is in the top ten all time in wins....a pitcher who was top ten all time in Wins would breeze into the HOF....

actually 3 of the top 10 wins leaders in MLB history had to be voted in by the veterans committee.

that comparison doesnt work at all, because baseball is harder to get into the wins top 10 now a days because of the 5 man rotation, larger use of relief pitchers and pitch counts. Hockey is actually easier to win games now because of the 82 game schedule, which was as few as 60 games in the 40s and 70 games in the 50s and 60s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

expanding on my last point, 7 of the top 11 (2 tied for 10th spot) played since 1990. So being in the top 10 in wins doesnt mean Ozzie was one of the 10 best goalies at winning games, because the stat doesnt mean the same thing today as it did before, what it really means is he is tied for the 6th most wins of goalies in the past 20 or so years. Does that make him a hall of famer? makes it a little different way to look at it, but still probably gets him in. I just thought Id share that considering all the "he has top 10 overall stats" arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...