double5son10
Registered User
Doesn't belong. As others have mentioned no hardware, no post season honors but I won't dwell on that. Cheevers seems to get most of his traction from two things, that he was very good in the 1974 WHA--Soviets Summit where a number of the Soviets apparently said he was the best NHL goalie he faced and the two Stanley Cups. These are the things that seem to have made his reputation as a "money" goalie, someone who was clutch. That reputation is what I really have issue with.
I won't argue with his performance in 1970 Cup run, nor the previous season where the Bruins fell just short against the nemesis Canadiens. Cheevers was outstanding in both. 1972 as mentioned above he was good, Johnston was better. Cheevers however seems to get most of the credit for because he was in net for the Cup clincher and pitched a shutout. Cheevers himself has said he was very good that game, crediting his defense for clearing pucks away and the Rangers for hitting iron on a couple of occasions. Still, give him credit for a good playoffs.
So that's two excellent playoffs and one good one. But sandwiched in there is 1971. There seems to be some belief, as reflected in the OP, that if Cheevers is in net for game 2 that the Bruins don't melt down and they therefore win the series. That seems like some magical thinking to me. The Bruins as a TEAM were terrible after building the 5-1 lead. Three of the Canadiens goals were on breakaways by Richard, Lemaire, and Mahovlich, all HoFers but somehow the result is Johnston's fault. But let's dispense with that for a moment and look at the series as a whole. In game 5 the Bruins absolutely buried the Canadiens, outshooting them 56-27 and putting 7 past Dryden. One more win and they clinch. So what happens to the "money" goalie in games 6 & 7? He puts up a 84.4 save % in the two games combined and gets thoroughly outplayed by the rookie Dryden.
I won't say much about the WHA yrs. other than to question the OPs statement that he was the definite best goalie in the rival league. On what is that based? Cheevers was certainly the best in 1972-73 when he was voted a 1st Teamer and won the Hastkins award but beyond that his future backup in Boston Ronnie Graham was more celebrated with postseason honors than Cheevers. Also, the Bruins went to the Finals with Gilbert, so they barely missed a beat without Cheevers (as compared to say Montreal sans Dryden).
So back to the NHL in '76. And this is where, to me anyway, that reputation absolutely falls apart. He splits time with Gilbert, who notably was given the start in gm.7 against the Kings and pitched the shutout. In the 2nd rd. against the Flyers the split-time continues and with the Bruins down 1-2 in the series Cheevers gets the start but gets outplayed by Wayne Stephenson, stopping 21 of 25 in a 2-4 loss. Gilbert then gets the start in game 5. So no money there.
In the '77 Finals he's AWFUL. Admittedly it's against arguably the greatest team ever but Cheevers performance is an absolute dog. Discounting the OT game 4 where he played well when it didn't matter much, through games 1-3 Cheevers stops only 48 of 62, for a miserable 77.4 save %. And it's not like he was getting shelled. Shots against were 24, 19, 19. No money there. Woof.
1978 Finals and the Bruins are playing out of their minds after gm.1, losing in OT in gm.2 then winning at home for games 3 & 4. Momentum is all on the Bs side going in to the key game 5 in Montreal. Unfortunately Cheevers lays an egg, giving up four goals in two periods, including a slapper to Lemaire from outside the blueline with just over a minute left in the second period. Goodnight Cheesy. Cherry sits him in favor of backup Ronnie Grahame for the 3rd, and it's 4-1 Canadiens. Game 6 is a similar game to its predecessor and in spite of an early lead the Bruins again fall 4-1 and Habs win the Cup. Cheevers combined save % in games 5 & 6 is 83.7 (41 of 49). No money there.
1979 Semis and Cheevers is lifted in favor of Gilbert who plays very well and gets the Bruins back in the series. Cheevers combined save % after games 1 & 2: 80.0. Nope, no money.
His final playoff series is against the Islanders in '80. He goes 1-4 w/ a 86.3 save %. Yes, he's facing a dynasty in the making, but for such a celebrated "money" goalie the results are again completely underwhelming. A 12 year NHL career and he's really just got three good playoffs? I just find his whole reputation as some meal-ticket stopper utterly baffling.
So a goalie who has no postseason awards or honors, who never got a single Hart trophy vote in the whole of his career, who outside of the two Cups he won sitting behind Orr & Esposito continually melted down in key playoff games, is in the HoF. Good for him, but he's a really, really weak selection imv.
I won't argue with his performance in 1970 Cup run, nor the previous season where the Bruins fell just short against the nemesis Canadiens. Cheevers was outstanding in both. 1972 as mentioned above he was good, Johnston was better. Cheevers however seems to get most of the credit for because he was in net for the Cup clincher and pitched a shutout. Cheevers himself has said he was very good that game, crediting his defense for clearing pucks away and the Rangers for hitting iron on a couple of occasions. Still, give him credit for a good playoffs.
So that's two excellent playoffs and one good one. But sandwiched in there is 1971. There seems to be some belief, as reflected in the OP, that if Cheevers is in net for game 2 that the Bruins don't melt down and they therefore win the series. That seems like some magical thinking to me. The Bruins as a TEAM were terrible after building the 5-1 lead. Three of the Canadiens goals were on breakaways by Richard, Lemaire, and Mahovlich, all HoFers but somehow the result is Johnston's fault. But let's dispense with that for a moment and look at the series as a whole. In game 5 the Bruins absolutely buried the Canadiens, outshooting them 56-27 and putting 7 past Dryden. One more win and they clinch. So what happens to the "money" goalie in games 6 & 7? He puts up a 84.4 save % in the two games combined and gets thoroughly outplayed by the rookie Dryden.
I won't say much about the WHA yrs. other than to question the OPs statement that he was the definite best goalie in the rival league. On what is that based? Cheevers was certainly the best in 1972-73 when he was voted a 1st Teamer and won the Hastkins award but beyond that his future backup in Boston Ronnie Graham was more celebrated with postseason honors than Cheevers. Also, the Bruins went to the Finals with Gilbert, so they barely missed a beat without Cheevers (as compared to say Montreal sans Dryden).
So back to the NHL in '76. And this is where, to me anyway, that reputation absolutely falls apart. He splits time with Gilbert, who notably was given the start in gm.7 against the Kings and pitched the shutout. In the 2nd rd. against the Flyers the split-time continues and with the Bruins down 1-2 in the series Cheevers gets the start but gets outplayed by Wayne Stephenson, stopping 21 of 25 in a 2-4 loss. Gilbert then gets the start in game 5. So no money there.
In the '77 Finals he's AWFUL. Admittedly it's against arguably the greatest team ever but Cheevers performance is an absolute dog. Discounting the OT game 4 where he played well when it didn't matter much, through games 1-3 Cheevers stops only 48 of 62, for a miserable 77.4 save %. And it's not like he was getting shelled. Shots against were 24, 19, 19. No money there. Woof.
1978 Finals and the Bruins are playing out of their minds after gm.1, losing in OT in gm.2 then winning at home for games 3 & 4. Momentum is all on the Bs side going in to the key game 5 in Montreal. Unfortunately Cheevers lays an egg, giving up four goals in two periods, including a slapper to Lemaire from outside the blueline with just over a minute left in the second period. Goodnight Cheesy. Cherry sits him in favor of backup Ronnie Grahame for the 3rd, and it's 4-1 Canadiens. Game 6 is a similar game to its predecessor and in spite of an early lead the Bruins again fall 4-1 and Habs win the Cup. Cheevers combined save % in games 5 & 6 is 83.7 (41 of 49). No money there.
1979 Semis and Cheevers is lifted in favor of Gilbert who plays very well and gets the Bruins back in the series. Cheevers combined save % after games 1 & 2: 80.0. Nope, no money.
His final playoff series is against the Islanders in '80. He goes 1-4 w/ a 86.3 save %. Yes, he's facing a dynasty in the making, but for such a celebrated "money" goalie the results are again completely underwhelming. A 12 year NHL career and he's really just got three good playoffs? I just find his whole reputation as some meal-ticket stopper utterly baffling.
So a goalie who has no postseason awards or honors, who never got a single Hart trophy vote in the whole of his career, who outside of the two Cups he won sitting behind Orr & Esposito continually melted down in key playoff games, is in the HoF. Good for him, but he's a really, really weak selection imv.
Last edited:
