Adam Kirshenblatt: HHOF Making the Case: Curtis Joseph/ Playoff Predictions

First

I have known Cujo for a long time, so I am biased. But I think that he definitely deserves a place in the Hall. He was a tremendous goalie, and his stats show that. Such a great human being, and great player.

Sure he never got it completely done in the playoffs, but he also carried several teams further than they should have gone before being knocked out.

Cojo makes the HHF becuase he played in Toronto.

No Cup(s) or Vezina(s). So, no. I don't think he should be in. At least you can point at Cups when arguing for Osgood.

No Cup(s) or Vezina(s). So, no. I don't think he should be in. At least you can point at Cups when arguing for Osgood.
- TheRollingPuck

Agreed and Cujo could not get it done with Det. I don't think Osgood is a Hall of Famer either. I would put Potvin in before Cujo!

If Ed Belfour is a Hall of Famer, Curtis Joseph should be as well. Given context, Joseph's numbers are every bit as good as Belfour's (and arguably better); he just played on much worse teams.

And about the playoffs: Curtis Joseph's career playoff save percentage is .917 in 133 games. That would be a great figure for a goalie in today's NHL; Joseph did it over a period of time (1990-2008) where league average save percentage ran from a low of .881 to a high of .911. Joseph was a great playoff goalie. His teams just stunk. Or, in the case of the Red Wings, couldn't score.

Joseph's performance should have been more than good enough to beat Anaheim in 2003 with the team he had in front of him, but the Red Wings scored just 6 goals in 4 games. The following year Joseph put up a .939 with a a 1.39 (!) GAA in about 8 and a half games' worth of playing, and still just went 4-4. All in all, Curtis Joseph allowed just 22 goals in about 13 and a half games' worth of playing time in Detroit, with a combined save percentage of .931. Detroit allowed just 1.64 goals per 60 minutes in the playoffs with Joseph in net. And they went 4-8. It is stupid to pin that on Joseph. He was fabulous. But he can't do anything if the team in front of him can't score.

All in all I think I would put Joseph fourth in his generation, behind Hasek, Roy, and Brodeur (in that order) and slightly ahead of Belfour. Hasek I think is the best of all time, and Roy might be No. 2. Brodeur I think is generally overrated, but still almost certainly top 10 all time. Joseph never won a Vezina Trophy (having your best years overlap with Roy and Hasek can do that), but maybe should have won it in 1993. I think you can also make a good case that Joseph is the greatest goaltender never to win a Vezina under the modern criteria for the trophy (it's either him or Luongo, probably).

So the question is, how small is your Hall? If you want to restrict the Hall to only the very very brightest and best in the history of the sport, then okay, maybe Joseph's on your cutline. But I think where they have the standard drawn now, he's definitely worthy. He wasn't just very good; he was great, even if his teams stunk and he was generally underappreciated during his peak years in the early 90s.

Maybe if he had stuck with St. Louis longer, or if things didn't go sour in Detroit (for reasons completely out of his control) he might have actually won a Cup or two and wouldn't have to deal with this perception that he couldn't get it done in the playoffs, which is not only false but also (as Adam rightly points out) is unfairly held against goalies in a way that it is not held against skaters. Nobody would have cared if Bourque never won a Cup, in terms of evaluating his Hall candidacy or placing him among the all-time greats. Nobody should care that Joseph never won either; what matters is how well Joseph himself played.

If Ed Belfour is a Hall of Famer, Curtis Joseph should be as well. Given context, Joseph's numbers are every bit as good as Belfour's (and arguably better); he just played on much worse teams.

And about the playoffs: Curtis Joseph's career playoff save percentage is .917 in 133 games. That would be a great figure for a goalie in today's NHL; Joseph did it over a period of time (1990-2008) where league average save percentage ran from a low of .881 to a high of .911. Joseph was a great playoff goalie. His teams just stunk. Or, in the case of the Red Wings, couldn't score.

Joseph's performance should have been more than good enough to beat Anaheim in 2003 with the team he had in front of him, but the Red Wings scored just 6 goals in 4 games. The following year Joseph put up a .939 with a a 1.39 (!) GAA in about 8 and a half games' worth of playing, and still just went 4-4. All in all, Curtis Joseph allowed just 22 goals in about 13 and a half games' worth of playing time in Detroit, with a combined save percentage of .931. Detroit allowed just 1.64 goals per 60 minutes in the playoffs with Joseph in net. And they went 4-8. It is stupid to pin that on Joseph. He was fabulous. But he can't do anything if the team in front of him can't score.

All in all I think I would put Joseph fourth in his generation, behind Hasek, Roy, and Brodeur (in that order) and slightly ahead of Belfour. Hasek I think is the best of all time, and Roy might be No. 2. Brodeur I think is generally overrated, but still almost certainly top 10 all time. Joseph never won a Vezina Trophy (having your best years overlap with Roy and Hasek can do that), but maybe should have won it in 1993. I think you can also make a good case that Joseph is the greatest goaltender never to win a Vezina under the modern criteria for the trophy (it's either him or Luongo, probably).

So the question is, how small is your Hall? If you want to restrict the Hall to only the very very brightest and best in the history of the sport, then okay, maybe Joseph's on your cutline. But I think where they have the standard drawn now, he's definitely worthy. He wasn't just very good; he was great, even if his teams stunk and he was generally underappreciated during his peak years in the early 90s.

Maybe if he had stuck with St. Louis longer, or if things didn't go sour in Detroit (for reasons completely out of his control) he might have actually won a Cup or two and wouldn't have to deal with this perception that he couldn't get it done in the playoffs, which is not only false but also (as Adam rightly points out) is unfairly held against goalies in a way that it is not held against skaters. Nobody would have cared if Bourque never won a Cup, in terms of evaluating his Hall candidacy or placing him among the all-time greats. Nobody should care that Joseph never won either; what matters is how well Joseph himself played.
- Sven22

Just look at his stats, it's a no-brainer. In the playoffs he was absolutely criminal. Fourth all time in wins. Not sure what else you have to do, it's not like he could score goals for his teams too. Also a class guy who gave back to the communities he played in, especially for disadvantaged kids.

- Champ

Most goalie stats that are a reflection of individual (namely, save percentage and various adjustments thereof) rather than team (to some extent GAA and shutouts, and especially wins) performance are not especially kind to Brodeur. His career save percentage is probably a few points lower than it should be (there's good evidence that New Jersey scorekeepers undercount shots, meaning Brodeur is probably not getting credit for all of his saves), but even once you factor that in, plus giving him credit for his puckhandling skills, he's still well short of Hasek and Roy.

Both those guys were more dominant at their peaks, and both were better NHL goalies at a more advanced age. Roy was still elite when he retired at 37. Hasek was putting up elite numbers at 41 with Ottawa and league-average numbers with Detroit at 42. Brodeur's last elite season relative his peers was around age 35 and he's been well below average since turning 38.

I don't know, I guess I don't think it's way out of left field to say that Brodeur is only, say, maybe the 6th best goaltender in the 100-year history of the NHL. He's an all-time great, I just think think the general fan impression that he's clear top 3 or even No. 1 is a little off.

If you want to respond to that with just a bunch of laughing faces, though, that's cool.

Most goalie stats that are a reflection of individual (namely, save percentage and various adjustments thereof) rather than team (to some extent GAA and shutouts, and especially wins) performance are not especially kind to Brodeur. His career save percentage is probably a few points lower than it should be (there's good evidence that New Jersey scorekeepers undercount shots, meaning Brodeur is probably not getting credit for all of his saves), but even once you factor that in, plus giving him credit for his puckhandling skills, he's still well short of Hasek and Roy.

Both those guys were more dominant at their peaks, and both were better NHL goalies at a more advanced age. Roy was still elite when he retired at 37. Hasek was putting up elite numbers at 41 with Ottawa and league-average numbers with Detroit at 42. Brodeur's last elite season relative his peers was around age 35 and he's been well below average since turning 38.

I don't know, I guess I don't think it's way out of left field to say that Brodeur is only, say, maybe the 6th best goaltender in the 100-year history of the NHL. He's an all-time great, I just think think the general fan impression that he's clear top 3 or even No. 1 is a little off.

If you want to respond to that with just a bunch of laughing faces, though, that's cool.
- Sven22

Saying he is behind Roy and Hasek is fine, but too say the winningest goaltender in the history of the game is overrated is a stretch. Plain and simple, Marty just wins and not because he had great teams in front of him.

I put Roy ahead of Hasek because he is the only player in the history of hockey to win 3 Conn Symth. Gretzky could not do it, Mario could not do it and Bobby Orr could not do it. He is the most clutch goaltender of all time.

I didn't realize that Brodeur had surpassed CuJo in career losses, but that has always, oddly enough, been the stat that I use to defend CuJo. You don't set the NHL record for career losses by being a "good" goaltender. If you were only good you would have been canned long before having the opportunity to lose that much.

Leafs in 6

- Champ

Haha I didn't see that you bolded part before and was trying to figure out what your issue with the post was. I thought it was nicely written. But I do agree, Brodeur may be overrated by some, but he is definitely one of the better goalies of all time. Top 10 easily, where he falls in that depends on how much value each person places on each stat I guess.

I think there were a clear cut 3 best goalies of the era in Roy, Brodeur and Hasek (in the order I'd put them). But Joseph was just behind them, and on a stronger team (or teams) I think he would be knocking on the door of that top 3. Again, it's an easy choice for me to put him in the Hall.

Saying he is behind Roy and Hasek is fine, but too say the winningest goaltender in the history of the game is overrated is a stretch. Plain and simple, Marty just wins and not because he had great teams in front of him.

I put Roy ahead of Hasek because he is the only player in the history of hockey to win 3 Conn Symth. Gretzky could not do it, Mario could not do it and Bobby Orr could not do it. He is the most clutch goaltender of all time.
- Champ

Maybe I should have said "slightly" overrated?

Not trying to bust Brodeur's chops here, I just don't think he's quite as good as he is generally perceived to be. A lot of people think he's the GOAT. I think he's behind Hasek and Roy for sure (EDIT: by "for sure" I don't mean he's "way" behind them, I just think the gap is small but clearly there and identifiable) and in the conversation about who rounds out the top 5 with the likes of Plante, Hall, Dryden, Tretiak, and maybe some of the hard-to-contextualize oldies like Vezina and Benedict.

I don't think saying a guy is "maybe about as good as Ken Dryden" is a particularly shameful thing to say.

Adam Kirshenblatt: HHOF Making the Case: Curtis Joseph/ Playoff Predictions
- MasWE

No. He never won a Vezina and never played in a SCF.
Kipper did both, arguably had a better (just shorter) career. And as biased as I am, I don't have him in it either. It isn't the hall of very good, it is the hall of the elite.

Maybe I should have said "slightly" overrated?

Not trying to bust Brodeur's chops here, I just don't think he's quite as good as he is generally perceived to be. A lot of people think he's the GOAT. I think he's behind Hasek and Roy for sure (EDIT: by "for sure" I don't mean he's "way" behind them, I just think the gap is small but clearly there and identifiable) and in the conversation about who rounds out the top 5 with the likes of Plante, Hall, Dryden, Tretiak, and maybe some of the hard-to-contextualize oldies like Vezina and Benedict.

I don't think saying a guy is "maybe about as good as Ken Dryden" is a particularly shameful thing to say.
- Sven22

You are missing Sawchuk. And I think Roy is the best goalie I have seen play. Best ever? I was only born in the early 80s, but I would find it to be a hard argument to say he isn't.

All in all, he deserves to be In...hands down.