Crosby2010
Registered User
- Mar 4, 2023
- 1,114
- 935
Who are those names do you think? There is always those guys that desperately needed a Stanley Cup and that would have likely propelled them into the Hall. I think we'd have slightly more positive memories of them and it would have put them over the top. I'll list mine.
Rick Middleton: You can argue he belongs already and I am okay with that. He had so many close calls with Boston and while I wonder what would have happened had he won in Boston in 1988 and then retired I think had the Bruins won in 1978 or 1979 with him as a central part of it than it would have changed everything for him. In 1979 he's right there for the Conn Smythe with Ratelle had they kept going to the final. They beat the Rangers and depending on how the final goes he could have won the Smythe. But he's hoisting the Cup, so I think this puts him in.
Andy Moog: In before the "He DID win the Cup................" crowd comes in. Yes, he did. And I will mention he was actually in net the last two and a bit games in 1984 for the Oilers, replacing an injured Fuhr. He did well, but was it "his" Cup? When I am thinking Moog I am thinking of a guy we all know contributed but was not there in the playoffs. He wasn't the #1 guy. No shame in this since Fuhr was that guy, but you have to wonder how do things change if Moog wins his own Cup as the #1 starter? For example, in 1983 he took the Oilers to the Cup final. What changes if he wins against the Islanders? Or in either one of 1990, 1991 or 1992? I would say especially 1990 against his old team, that would have been special. Maybe there becomes a bit more of a "Fleury" feel to him if he has his own Cup knowing he could do it. And then the shared Cups are just a bonus. Either way, I think he's in if he wins in 1990.
John Vanbiesbrouck: Never thought of as a playoff goalie per se, but imagine winning in 1996. He's got the Smythe in his back pocket easily if the Panthers beat the Avs. For me I think he has a harder time than Moog, even with the Vezina and the other Vezina-esque year in 1994. Here's why. He wasn't strong in the playoffs. Maybe the one Cup gets him over the top in 1996 and the rest is glossed over. Because beating Mario and Jagr and then Roy, Sakic and Forsberg is something that would be tattooed on him for the rest of his life.
Jeremy Roenick: Lots have him pretty close as it is. There is that drop off after 1994 where he went from dazzling player to just pretty good player for a while. He's certainly in the running for the Conn Smythe in 1992 had the Hawks won, although Chelios was right there as well. Does the fact that he sort of gets lost in that big log jam of players in the early to mid 1990s get glossed over if he is a Cup champ? Does he stay in Chicago longer? Who knows. I would say that he had this flair for the dramatic and his 4 playoff overtime goals get pumped up even more and he's remembered as more of a playoff guy. Not that he was bad in the playoffs to begin with, he had his moments. Even in 2008 he scored 4 points in Game 7 against the Flames which came out of nowhere. I have to wonder if this puts him over the top. It might very well have.
Curtis Joseph: So Cujo is in the Hall with a Cup win, is that pretty close to a consensus? Reason being for me is that he already has that insane reputation for the 1st round of the playoffs under his belt. And he has a pretty good case with his Vezina voting: 2, 3, 3, 4, 5. I honestly think the Cup is what stopped him from getting in. Because as the rounds went on in the playoffs his magic sort of faded away. But if he proved he could do it once he'd be forgiven for the other times. Also, he never made the Cup final. So he'd have that elusive great postseason. Beezer has that and lost in 1996, but Joseph never had that at all and was still a modest 63-66 in the postseason despite never making the final. And look at his save % in the playoffs. There are some of those cases where he could only do so much. 1993 comes to mind, 2003 and 2004 also. Not sure he can do anything more outside of taking a blow torch to the competition and eliminating them. So a Cup really changes his legacy, in my opinion.
Rick Middleton: You can argue he belongs already and I am okay with that. He had so many close calls with Boston and while I wonder what would have happened had he won in Boston in 1988 and then retired I think had the Bruins won in 1978 or 1979 with him as a central part of it than it would have changed everything for him. In 1979 he's right there for the Conn Smythe with Ratelle had they kept going to the final. They beat the Rangers and depending on how the final goes he could have won the Smythe. But he's hoisting the Cup, so I think this puts him in.
Andy Moog: In before the "He DID win the Cup................" crowd comes in. Yes, he did. And I will mention he was actually in net the last two and a bit games in 1984 for the Oilers, replacing an injured Fuhr. He did well, but was it "his" Cup? When I am thinking Moog I am thinking of a guy we all know contributed but was not there in the playoffs. He wasn't the #1 guy. No shame in this since Fuhr was that guy, but you have to wonder how do things change if Moog wins his own Cup as the #1 starter? For example, in 1983 he took the Oilers to the Cup final. What changes if he wins against the Islanders? Or in either one of 1990, 1991 or 1992? I would say especially 1990 against his old team, that would have been special. Maybe there becomes a bit more of a "Fleury" feel to him if he has his own Cup knowing he could do it. And then the shared Cups are just a bonus. Either way, I think he's in if he wins in 1990.
John Vanbiesbrouck: Never thought of as a playoff goalie per se, but imagine winning in 1996. He's got the Smythe in his back pocket easily if the Panthers beat the Avs. For me I think he has a harder time than Moog, even with the Vezina and the other Vezina-esque year in 1994. Here's why. He wasn't strong in the playoffs. Maybe the one Cup gets him over the top in 1996 and the rest is glossed over. Because beating Mario and Jagr and then Roy, Sakic and Forsberg is something that would be tattooed on him for the rest of his life.
Jeremy Roenick: Lots have him pretty close as it is. There is that drop off after 1994 where he went from dazzling player to just pretty good player for a while. He's certainly in the running for the Conn Smythe in 1992 had the Hawks won, although Chelios was right there as well. Does the fact that he sort of gets lost in that big log jam of players in the early to mid 1990s get glossed over if he is a Cup champ? Does he stay in Chicago longer? Who knows. I would say that he had this flair for the dramatic and his 4 playoff overtime goals get pumped up even more and he's remembered as more of a playoff guy. Not that he was bad in the playoffs to begin with, he had his moments. Even in 2008 he scored 4 points in Game 7 against the Flames which came out of nowhere. I have to wonder if this puts him over the top. It might very well have.
Curtis Joseph: So Cujo is in the Hall with a Cup win, is that pretty close to a consensus? Reason being for me is that he already has that insane reputation for the 1st round of the playoffs under his belt. And he has a pretty good case with his Vezina voting: 2, 3, 3, 4, 5. I honestly think the Cup is what stopped him from getting in. Because as the rounds went on in the playoffs his magic sort of faded away. But if he proved he could do it once he'd be forgiven for the other times. Also, he never made the Cup final. So he'd have that elusive great postseason. Beezer has that and lost in 1996, but Joseph never had that at all and was still a modest 63-66 in the postseason despite never making the final. And look at his save % in the playoffs. There are some of those cases where he could only do so much. 1993 comes to mind, 2003 and 2004 also. Not sure he can do anything more outside of taking a blow torch to the competition and eliminating them. So a Cup really changes his legacy, in my opinion.
