Osgood for HOF!!!!!!

Osgood for HOF!!!!!!
- HenryHockey

Why not ? He’s #13 is all-time wins? Doesn’t matter what team was in front of him during his career. Did he let in some bad goals, sure, but what goalie hasn’t. He also played out of his mind in a few playoffs and without his performance, we’d have lost early in a few of this series.

At some point, people will give him the credit he deserves.

Holland loved Osgood like a son. He kept him way after his best before date expired. But there's no reason why a young Jimmy Howard should've played 4 years in Grand Rapids. Making your NHL debut at 25? Ridiculous. I mean you can't argue against the Hasek-Osgood tandem in 2008. No Osgood no Cup after Dom $hit the bed in Nashville. Maybe I'm arguing against myself. Surely a young Jimmy Howard could've been better than Ty "my nose is too big" Conklin?
- gergeswillems

Let’s talk about 2008-09.

The Red Wings scored 289 goals that season and only allowed 2274 shots against. Do you know what that means? It means that they probably would have been a .500 team and made the playoffs even with .873 goaltending. They actually only got .894 combined from Osgood and Conklin (league average that year was .906) and they still won 51 games.

Ken Holland himself could have descended from the press box, strapped on the pads and won 40 games with that Red Wings team.

Seems like it would have been the ideal environment to break in a 24-year-old "kid" who was already overripe at that point. Especially in a season where Osgood was cratering hard and Conklin was ... well, Ty Conklin.

The 2007-08 team the year before was even better, and Hasek had a pretty bad year (not his fault, he was frickin’ 43 years old). Again, hard to bump the GOAT (who actually was pretty good the year before) and Osgood (who was enjoying his last good regular season) from the lineup, but it also wouldn't surprise me if Howard was already better than both of them at that point.

Since we’re on the topic of Osgood and the HHOF:

Osgood never had an elite season statistically.

In 17 career seasons, Osgood only finished in the top 5 in Vezina voting once (in the season Detroit won 62 games) and top 10 three times. Same for post-season all-star selections (voted on by media). 1996 and 2008 were the only two seasons that Osgood managed to get at least one top-3 vote from at least one member of both voting groups.

Osgood only appeared in 55 percent of the games that his teams played during his career (744 GP out of 1362), an average of about 45 GP / 82 games. He was his team’s backup almost as frequently as he was the starter.

During Osgood’s career, his team’s actually stopped pucks and won games at a slightly higher rate with him on the bench (.906 sv%, .640 w%) than with him in the net (.905 sv%, .629 w%)

Osgood had a 7-1 record in playoff series as a starter when his team was 20 or more regular season points better than their opposition, and an 8-8 record in playoff series as a starter when his teams were less than 20 points better (or the underdogs). The Red Wings were 9-4 in playoff series where Osgood was the backup.

Osgood to me is like the goalie version of Kris Draper. He had middling talent, and he was never anywhere close to the best in the league. He managed to claw out a long and successful career anyway, in part because the teams he played on were often mind-blowingly great but also because he was incredibly tenacious, hard-working, determined, confident, and mentally tough.

Does he belong in the Hall? Eff no! That would be like asking if Kris Draper belongs in the Hall.

That doesn’t mean that what he accomplished isn’t damned impressive in its own way, though.

Let’s talk about 2008-09.

The Red Wings scored 289 goals that season and only allowed 2274 shots against. Do you know what that means? It means that they probably would have been a .500 team and made the playoffs even with .873 goaltending. They actually only got .894 combined from Osgood and Conklin (league average that year was .906) and they still won 51 games.

Ken Holland himself could have descended from the press box, strapped on the pads and won 40 games with that Red Wings team.

Seems like it would have been the ideal environment to break in a 24-year-old "kid" who was already overripe at that point. Especially in a season where Osgood was cratering hard and Conklin was ... well, Ty Conklin.

The 2007-08 team the year before was even better, and Hasek had a pretty bad year (not his fault, he was frickin’ 43 years old). Again, hard to bump the GOAT (who actually was pretty good the year before) and Osgood (who was enjoying his last good regular season) from the lineup, but it also wouldn't surprise me if Howard was already better than both of them at that point.
- Sven22

I recall that 2008-09 season. Not much defense was being played. Hossa was added to a defending Cup champion. They'd fall behind knowing they'd come back and score enough goals to win games. A young Jimmy Howard most certainly could've backed up Osgood. But with Holland it was always "tie goes to the veteran." No pun intended.

Osgood for HOF!!!!!!
- HenryHockey

I grew tired of the Osgood HOF debate many years ago. I don't believe he should be in the Hall of Fame. But believe me, I've heard all the arguments why he should be. I'm not participating in this one. Again.

I grew tired of the Osgood HOF debate many years ago. I don't believe he should be in the Hall of Fame. But believe me, I've heard all the arguments why he should be. I'm not participating in this one. Again.
- gergeswillems

I've written about it often enough and refined my arguments to the point where it's 80% copying and pasting at this point.

I recall that 2008-09 season. Not much defense was being played. Hossa was added to a defending Cup champion. They'd fall behind knowing they'd come back and score enough goals to win games. A young Jimmy Howard most certainly could've backed up Osgood. But with Holland it was always "tie goes to the veteran." No pun intended.
- gergeswillems

I also watched a lot of hockey that year and I think the team defense was better than you give it credit for. If anything I think the Red Wings were giving up lower than average shot quality (Micah Blake McCurdy's recent work estimating shot difficulty for seasons since 2008-09 seems to back this up as well).

They did fall behind and come back, but it wasn't because no defense was being played. The goaltending was bad.

I also watched a lot of hockey that year and I think the team defense was better than you give it credit for. If anything I think the Red Wings were giving up lower than average shot quality (Micah Blake McCurdy's recent work estimating shot difficulty for seasons since 2008-09 seems to back this up as well).

They did fall behind and come back, but it wasn't because no defense was being played. The goaltending was bad.
- Sven22

I thought they were lazy. They'd literally turn it on when they had to. Bad habits were being formed and I didn't like it. But if they were healthy they would've beaten the Pens in the SCF again. I won't even get into Gary-Gate.

I've written about it often enough and refined my arguments to the point where it's 80% copying and pasting at this point.
- Sven22

Yeah it's just beating a dead horse really. No one is changing anyone's minds.

Since we’re on the topic of Osgood and the HHOF:

Osgood never had an elite season statistically.

In 17 career seasons, Osgood only finished in the top 5 in Vezina voting once (in the season Detroit won 62 games) and top 10 three times. Same for post-season all-star selections (voted on by media). 1996 and 2008 were the only two seasons that Osgood managed to get at least one top-3 vote from at least one member of both voting groups.

Osgood only appeared in 55 percent of the games that his teams played during his career (744 GP out of 1362), an average of about 45 GP / 82 games. He was his team’s backup almost as frequently as he was the starter.

During Osgood’s career, his team’s actually stopped pucks and won games at a slightly higher rate with him on the bench (.906 sv%, .640 w%) than with him in the net (.905 sv%, .629 w%)

Osgood had a 7-1 record in playoff series as a starter when his team was 20 or more regular season points better than their opposition, and an 8-8 record in playoff series as a starter when his teams were less than 20 points better (or the underdogs). The Red Wings were 9-4 in playoff series where Osgood was the backup.

Osgood to me is like the goalie version of Kris Draper. He had middling talent, and he was never anywhere close to the best in the league. He managed to claw out a long and successful career anyway, in part because the teams he played on were often mind-blowingly great but also because he was incredibly tenacious, hard-working, determined, confident, and mentally tough.

Does he belong in the Hall? Eff no! That would be like asking if Kris Draper belongs in the Hall.

That doesn’t mean that what he accomplished isn’t damned impressive in its own way, though.
- Sven22

Qzzy has the wins and the cups and good enough stats to be in the hall. I believe that the only one that has more wins than him and is not in the hall is Cujo. Cujo is cupless........

Qzzy has the wins and the cups and good enough stats to be in the hall. I believe that the only one that has more wins than him and is not in the hall is Cujo. Cujo is cupless........
- HenryHockey

Wins and cups are team stats. Even shutouts and GAA in most cases have as much or more to do with team defense than goalie ability.

Any reasonable attempt to isolate Osgood's individual performance from the context of the team surrounding him reveals him to be a very average to above average performer with uncommon staying power and consistency for a goalie of his ability level.

Osgood's first Cup as a starter, then Wings scored 3.41 goals per game and allowed less than 27 shots against per game in the playoffs. That means they only needed ~.872 from their goaltending to be even on the scoresheet with their opponents.

In his second, the Wings scored 3.27 per game and allowed just 23.6 shots against in the playoffs. .860 goaltending would have been enough to remain competitive.

I'm not saying Osgood was a passenger -- he was good both those years, especially 2008. But it's hard to overstate how incredible those teams were in front of him. He didn't need to steal games, he basically just needed to not suck for the Wings to have a great chance to win those Cups.

If you really, truly, seriously believe that Osgood winning two Cups with some of the greatest teams ever assembled elevates him above Joseph, a guy who spent pretty much his entire prime stuck on a very mediocre St. Louis Blues team, I don't know that we can really go much further with this debate.

I really don't think it's asking too much to expect that a goalie in the HHOF should, say, have finished top-5 in Vezina or postseason all-star voting more than once in his entire career. Or that he was trusted by his coaches to start a lot more than barely half the time. Or that his teams actually did better with him than without him.

Wins and cups are team stats. Even shutouts and GAA in most cases have as much or more to do with team defense than goalie ability.

Any reasonable attempt to isolate Osgood's individual performance from the context of the team surrounding him reveals him to be a very average to above average performer with uncommon staying power and consistency for a goalie of his ability level.

Osgood's first Cup as a starter, then Wings scored 3.41 goals per game and allowed less than 27 shots against per game in the playoffs. That means they only needed ~.872 from their goaltending to be even on the scoresheet with their opponents.

In his second, the Wings scored 3.27 per game and allowed just 23.6 shots against in the playoffs. .860 goaltending would have been enough to remain competitive.

I'm not saying Osgood was a passenger -- he was good both those years, especially 2008. But it's hard to overstate how incredible those teams were in front of him. He didn't need to steal games, he basically just needed to not suck for the Wings to have a great chance to win those Cups.

If you really, truly, seriously believe that Osgood winning two Cups with some of the greatest teams ever assembled elevates him above Joseph, a guy who spent pretty much his entire prime stuck on a very mediocre St. Louis Blues team, I don't know that we can really go much further with this debate.

I really don't think it's asking too much to expect that a goalie in the HHOF should, say, have finished top-5 in Vezina or postseason all-star voting more than once in his entire career. Or that he was trusted by his coaches to start a lot more than barely half the time. Or that his teams actually did better with him than without him.
- Sven22

Cup wins can often be misleading. They're important but there's different circumstances. Kris Draper and Kirk Maltby and Darren McCarty won 4 Cups each. Marcel Dionne never won a Cup and he's in the Hall of Fame. So were Maltby, Draper and McCarty all better than Dionne was? Of course not.

It's like the NFL. Ex crappy QB Trent Dilfer loves bragging about winning a Super Bowl with the Baltimore Ravens. They had a historically great defense and Dilfer rarely even threw the ball. But he's always saying "Me and Steve Young are the same because we each won a Super Bowl. I'm better than Dan Marino because I won a SB and he didn't." Uh, no. Young and Marino are in the Hall of Fame and you aren't, Dilfer.

Goaltending is only one part of the team. It may be the most important part, but it’s still just a fraction of the overall picture. I think almost everyone would agree with this.

As a consequence, if you take an average goalie and put him on the 1994-2009 Detroit Red Wings, he’s going to have much easier time winning games in the regular season and playoffs than if you put him on, say, the Florida Panthers. Again, I think basically everyone would agree with this.

So if you want to be serious about trying to evaluate the individual performance of a goaltender, you need to make a good faith effort to try to separate their results as best you can from the team context they played in.

Just about everyone agrees (or should agree) that Osgood benefitted from playing in Detroit. The question you need to try to answer is how much did he benefit?

Most people simply throw up their hands and say “no way to know.” Or they just go with their gut. I’m not satisfied with either of these approaches. The numbers are there; you just have to be willing to dig through them.

Doesn’t mean you will get a perfect answer (no perfect answers are possible) but at least you’ll have some actual evidence to stand on rather than your own gut.

I’ve given several attempts to try to quantify this from several different angles of approach:

- Did Osgood have good individual numbers (save percentage) relative to other goalies in the league? Not really. They were mostly average to above average. Unfortunately we don't have shot location data from most of Osgood's career to try to better estimate shot quality against, but I think it's highly unlikely those Red Wings teams were giving up a lot of high quality chances relative to a typical NHL team.

- Was Osgood widely considered by experts around the league to be one of the best goalies in the NHL? No. With the exception of 1995-96 he was never seriously in the conversation for the Vezina or first or second team all star selections.

- Was Osgood the clear-cut No. 1 on his own team the vast majority of his career? No. He only appeared in 55% of his team’s games. He lost his starting gig—twice—to a past-his-prime Mike Vernon. He was waived by a team with Yzerman, Fedorov, Shanahan, Lidstrom, and Chelios already on the roster because the GM felt the goaltending wasn’t good enough to get it done. Neither the Islanders nor the Blues liked him enough to keep him more than a year and a half. Post-lockout he was the clear No. 2 behind Manny Legace and couldn’t displace Hasek until the latter was 43 years old. Can you imagine any of this happening to Roy, or Hasek, or Brodeur, or Belfour?

- How did Osgood compare to his own backups statistically? The difference in individual and team success was almost indistinguishable. Actually his playing partners had better numbers overall than he did in the aggregate. Yes, he did play with some very good goalies throughout the years (Hasek, Legace) but a lot of not so good ones too (Cheveldae, Hodson, Ranford, Wregget, Conklin …).

No matter how you slice it, no matter which approach you take, the evidence suggests the same thing: Osgood was probably not much better than average.

Cup wins can often be misleading. They're important but there's different circumstances. Kris Draper and Kirk Maltby and Darren McCarty won 4 Cups each. Marcel Dionne never won a Cup and he's in the Hall of Fame. So were Maltby, Draper and McCarty all better than Dionne was? Of course not.

It's like the NFL. Ex crappy QB Trent Dilfer loves bragging about winning a Super Bowl with the Baltimore Ravens. They had a historically great defense and Dilfer rarely even threw the ball. But he's always saying "Me and Steve Young are the same because we each won a Super Bowl. I'm better than Dan Marino because I won a SB and he didn't." Uh, no. Young and Marino are in the Hall of Fame and you aren't, Dilfer.
- gergeswillems

You mean Kris Draper and Kirk Maltby and Darren McCarty are NOT in the HOF!?!?!?!?!

Goaltending is only one part of the team. It may be the most important part, but it’s still just a fraction of the overall picture. I think almost everyone would agree with this.

As a consequence, if you take an average goalie and put him on the 1994-2009 Detroit Red Wings, he’s going to have much easier time winning games in the regular season and playoffs than if you put him on, say, the Florida Panthers. Again, I think basically everyone would agree with this.

So if you want to be serious about trying to evaluate the individual performance of a goaltender, you need to make a good faith effort to try to separate their results as best you can from the team context they played in.

Just about everyone agrees (or should agree) that Osgood benefitted from playing in Detroit. The question you need to try to answer is how much did he benefit?

Most people simply throw up their hands and say “no way to know.” Or they just go with their gut. I’m not satisfied with either of these approaches. The numbers are there; you just have to be willing to dig through them.

Doesn’t mean you will get a perfect answer (no perfect answers are possible) but at least you’ll have some actual evidence to stand on rather than your own gut.

I’ve given several attempts to try to quantify this from several different angles of approach:

- Did Osgood have good individual numbers (save percentage) relative to other goalies in the league? Not really. They were mostly average to above average. Unfortunately we don't have shot location data from most of Osgood's career to try to better estimate shot quality against, but I think it's highly unlikely those Red Wings teams were giving up a lot of high quality chances relative to a typical NHL team.

- Was Osgood widely considered by experts around the league to be one of the best goalies in the NHL? No. With the exception of 1995-96 he was never seriously in the conversation for the Vezina or first or second team all star selections.

- Was Osgood the clear-cut No. 1 on his own team the vast majority of his career? No. He only appeared in 55% of his team’s games. He lost his starting gig—twice—to a past-his-prime Mike Vernon. He was waived by a team with Yzerman, Fedorov, Shanahan, Lidstrom, and Chelios already on the roster because the GM felt the goaltending wasn’t good enough to get it done. Neither the Islanders nor the Blues liked him enough to keep him more than a year and a half. Post-lockout he was the clear No. 2 behind Manny Legace and couldn’t displace Hasek until the latter was 43 years old. Can you imagine any of this happening to Roy, or Hasek, or Brodeur, or Belfour?

- How did Osgood compare to his own backups statistically? The difference in individual and team success was almost indistinguishable. Actually his playing partners had better numbers overall than he did in the aggregate. Yes, he did play with some very good goalies throughout the years (Hasek, Legace) but a lot of not so good ones too (Cheveldae, Hodson, Ranford, Wregget, Conklin …).

No matter how you slice it, no matter which approach you take, the evidence suggests the same thing: Osgood was probably not much better than average.
- Sven22

Ok ok I give up! Sure am glad Sawchuk is in the HOF. I met him at hockey camp when I was 15. He helped me with skating exercises that strenghened my legs and stride. That fall I surprised a lot of my piers with my improved skating!

Ok ok I give up! Sure am glad Sawchuk is in the HOF. I met him at hockey camp when I was 15. He helped me with skating exercises that strenghened my legs and stride. That fall I surprised a lot of my piers with my improved skating!
- HenryHockey

That is a really neat story!

This probably doesn't need to be said because you seem like a cool guy, but sometimes after a really long serious of posts arguing a point I feel like I need to step back and say, "Hey nothing personal, I'm just enjoying the discussion. Thanks for the convo and I hope you have a great day!"

I realize that I may sometimes come across as a little ... uh, maybe obsessed, or possessed or something. But it's never my intention to be rude to anyone. I hope everyone gets that.

That is a really neat story!

This probably doesn't need to be said because you seem like a cool guy, but sometimes after a really long serious of posts arguing a point I feel like I need to step back and say, "Hey nothing personal, I'm just enjoying the discussion. Thanks for the convo and I hope you have a great day!"

I realize that I may sometimes come across as a little ... uh, maybe obsessed, or possessed or something. But it's never my intention to be rude to anyone. I hope everyone gets that.
- Sven22

No, no, no,no! Never be apologetic for telling the truth! This comes from a guy that was told since being a youth that he was "brutally honest"
Always good to make a friend with someone that dosn't sugar coat his words,.....we already have way too many politicians!

You mean Kris Draper and Kirk Maltby and Darren McCarty are NOT in the HOF!?!?!?!?!

- HenryHockey

But Cups!

But Cups!
- gergeswillems

- HenryHockey

Ozzy has gone on to become a good actor. He starred as Prince Philip in seasons 1 and 2 of "The Crown" on Netflix.

Ozzy has gone on to become a good actor. He starred as Prince Philip in seasons 1 and 2 of "The Crown" on Netflix.


- gergeswillems

He is working on a HOF invite as a broadcaster right now! Well, maybe not. But he certainly has improved since he started!

He is working on a HOF invite as a broadcaster right now! Well, maybe not. But he certainly has improved since he started!
- HenryHockey

Ozzy will need some new material. He spends half of his time pumping Jimmy Howard's tires telling us how great #35 is. The other half of the time he's trying to out duel Mickey Redmond for biggest Red Wings homer. Paul uhhhh Woods and Redmond (boy oh boy) have battled for this prestigious title for decades. But Ozzy is gaining steam. He has youth on his side.

Ozzy will need some new material. He spends half of his time pumping Jimmy Howard's tires telling us how great #35 is. The other half of the time he's trying to out duel Mickey Redmond for biggest Red Wings homer. Paul uhhhh Woods and Redmond (boy oh boy) have battled for this prestigious title for decades. But Ozzy is gaining steam. He has youth on his side.
- gergeswillems

Not that this applies, but Doug Maclean gave a fairly candid look into a president/media relationship. Before the games, he would go to the broadcasters and say, “talk up this player. We’re trying to trade him”. He would direct their attention to things that would help set a narrative to try and pacify fans or increase interest. My wife and I were very lucky to meet Osgood a few times (she has an autographed game used stick and a jersey now). I do think he will find his way to the Hall of Fame, but it’s going to be a bit of a wait. The process is a bit different than I thought it was. There is an emphasis on cups, and Osgood falls prey to a lot of criticism.

I want to ask a favor of a few of you. Please be respectful here. If someone believes Osgood is good enough for the hall, don’t beat them up for it. Differing opinions exist, but please stop trying to beat someone into submission. We all have different views, and some of you love numbers and stats. It doesn’t make you right or someone else wrong.

Osgood is still 13th all time in wins. His post season play merits consideration. I hesitated on posting this because some of you are, well, bullies at times. It kills it for anyone with a slightly different opinion. This forum is a release for all of us. Stop trying to use it as a place to shut people down. This is the only time I will say any of this. Disagree, fine, but make someone feel stupid or inept for their opinion, that will not stand. Period.