Who Remembers Mike Richter?

[Asheville]

Show me he's better than Jose Theodore.

(Hint : If you don't give up early, you're losing your time)

Did I mention Theodore in my post?

 

[MXD]

Did I mention Theodore in my post?

No.
I did.
And I want you to explain me how Ranford is any better than Theodore.

 

[mrhockey193195]

Who Remembers Mike Richter?

I do! My favorite goalie of all time and my hero growing up (I was a goalie).

Mike Richter through 1997 was similar in stature to someone like Tuukka Rask. Consistently one of the top goalies in the game, but maybe never "the best." I really feel like if you stopped after 96-97 and looked at Richter's career, most people would agree that he was tracking to be a HOFer. Obviously, he declined pretty hard (not helped by how atrocious the Rangers were for the rest of his career) and injuries destroyed what was left of his career. That being said, he still had moments of brilliance (see: 2002 Olympics).

Richter at his best was probably as good as any goalie that ever lived. Unlike Roy, Hasek, Brodeur, and others, he couldn't maintain his best with consistency. And his bad games tended to be far worse than those of the all-time greats.

 

[Vanzig]

The HOF for some reason don’t induct the Goaltender as much as Forwards or Defenceman unfortunately and Mike Richter had an incredible Peak and even though his career was cut short by various injuries had a great career. Once the HOF finally Induct’s
TOM BARRASSO (Who was allegedly a Jerk) then maybe it will open the doors for other Goalie’s.

MIKE RICHTER has the STAT’S that Goalies (Past or Present) would kill for (1994 Stanley Cup, “Gold” in 1996 World Cup, “Silver” in 2002 Olympics, “Bronze” in 1986, Played in 3 All Star Games (Winning MVP in 1994 game), 300+ Career WINS, Inducted in the U.S. HOF, NY Rangers Retired his #35.

There is a List of Goalie’s who have a Chance and have a case for the Hockey Hall of Fame & are knocking on the HOF doorstep along with MIKE RICHTER,

(I’m Not Saying All Of These Goalie’s Deserve to Be In HOF)

- TOM BARRASSO
- CURTIS JOSPEH
- JOHN VANBIESBROUCK
- MIKE RICHTER
- MIKE VERNON
- EVGENI NABAKOV
- ANDY MOOG
- ROGER CROZIER
- RON HEXTALL
- ROBERTO LUONGO

 

[Asheville]

No.
I did.
And I want you to explain me how Ranford is any better than Theodore.

What's going on here? Now I'm being asked to defend Ranford against Theodore, a premise I may not even agree with in the first place?

[MOD]

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

Richter was fantastic when he was on. Exciting to watch, played a bit like Jonathan Quick.

 

[Asheville]

The HOF for some reason don’t induct the Goaltender as much as Forwards or Defenceman unfortunately and Mike Richter had an incredible Peak and even though his career was cut short by various injuries had a great career. Once the HOF finally Induct’s
TOM BARRASSO (Who was allegedly a Jerk) then maybe it will open the doors for other Goalie’s.

MIKE RICHTER has the STAT’S that Goalies (Past or Present) would kill for (1994 Stanley Cup, “Gold” in 1996 World Cup, “Silver” in 2002 Olympics, “Bronze” in 1986, Played in 3 All Star Games (Winning MVP in 1994 game), 300+ Career WINS, Inducted in the U.S. HOF, NY Rangers Retired his #35.

There is a List of Goalie’s who have a Chance and have a case for the Hockey Hall of Fame & are knocking on the HOF doorstep along with MIKE RICHTER,

(I’m Not Saying All Of These Goalie’s Deserve to Be In HOF)

- TOM BARRASSO
- CURTIS JOSPEH
- JOHN VANBIESBROUCK
- MIKE RICHTER
- MIKE VERNON
- EVGENI NABAKOV
- ANDY MOOG
- ROGER CROZIER
- RON HEXTALL
- ROBERTO LUONGO

Luongo is on track to retire with the highest save percentage of any goalie not named Hasek (currently 0.919)....along with an Olympic Gold, 9 seasons with a save percentage of at least 0.920 (!), nearing 500 wins and (2) 2nd team all-star selections. He's a lock.

None of the others are "knocking on the door." If they have hardware/individual accolades, then they're severely lacking in the stats department. Lu is the only one from that list with a nice combo of both.

 

[MXD]

What's going on here? Now I'm being asked to defend Ranford against Theodore, a premise I may not even agree with in the first place?

[MOD]

I took a guy whose career is obviously inferior to Richter (and somewhat similar to Ranford) and asked you to compared him to Ranford.

 

[Canucks1096]

I remember Richter stopping Bure on the Penalty shot in game 3. If Bure scored Canucks leading 3 to 0 but the score was 4-2 Rangers instead.

 

[blood gin]

He was a very fun goalie to watch. Very athletic, limber, great reflexes and a top competitor. When he was on he could look like an American Hasek and make the most ungodly saves. When he wasn't he could let some sloppy ones in. But overall a career good goalie with flashes of brilliance. Probably deserved a better finish to his career but the Rangers were decaying at that time and didn't give him much help at all

 

[Hockeyholic]

Absolutely stole the 96 World Cup for the US. He was unbelievable. Great postseason player too.

 

[ted2019]

The HOF for some reason don’t induct the Goaltender as much as Forwards or Defenceman unfortunately and Mike Richter had an incredible Peak and even though his career was cut short by various injuries had a great career. Once the HOF finally Induct’s
TOM BARRASSO (Who was allegedly a Jerk) then maybe it will open the doors for other Goalie’s.

MIKE RICHTER has the STAT’S that Goalies (Past or Present) would kill for (1994 Stanley Cup, “Gold” in 1996 World Cup, “Silver” in 2002 Olympics, “Bronze” in 1986, Played in 3 All Star Games (Winning MVP in 1994 game), 300+ Career WINS, Inducted in the U.S. HOF, NY Rangers Retired his #35.

There is a List of Goalie’s who have a Chance and have a case for the Hockey Hall of Fame & are knocking on the HOF doorstep along with MIKE RICHTER,

(I’m Not Saying All Of These Goalie’s Deserve to Be In HOF)

- TOM BARRASSO
- CURTIS JOSPEH
- JOHN VANBIESBROUCK
- MIKE RICHTER
- MIKE VERNON
- EVGENI NABAKOV
- ANDY MOOG
- ROGER CROZIER
- RON HEXTALL
- ROBERTO LUONGO

Richter had 1 great year and the rest of the time he was a .500 goalie. Never a post season AS higher then 4th, never only one top 3 Vezina finish. He was an above average goalie at best.

 

[Asheville]

I took a guy whose career is obviously inferior to Richter (and somewhat similar to Ranford) and asked you to compared him to Ranford.

Peak: Ranford......barely
Career: Thoedore....barely

 

[Asheville]

Richter...He was an above average goalie at best.

Yea, a couple (very) bright spots, but largely an above average goalie.

 

[Boxscore]

I loved Mike Richter, and as a Flyers fan, that was bitter sweet. He was a local kid from Philly area - Flourtown to be exact - yet he always seemed to kill the Flyers for the most part. As others have said, when Richter was "on" he was as great as anyone in the league. One of the few Rangers that I really loved - Brian Leetch being the other.

 

[mrhockey193195]

Richter had 1 great year and the rest of the time he was a .500 goalie. Never a post season AS higher then 4th, never only one top 3 Vezina finish. He was an above average goalie at best.

I disagree with this sentiment. Firstly, W/L is not a great metric to judge any goalie. Secondly, his lack of top AS finishes has more to do with his competition than his level of play. His career overlapped significantly with 3 of the 6 greatest goalies of all time (Brodeur, Hasek, Roy), and another top-15-ish goalie of all time (Belfour). As of 96-97, Richter was firmly in the list of top goalies outside of the four I mentioned (along with Joseph, Vanbiesbrouck, Barrasso, and maybe a couple others). Many actually thought he was the top of that list.

To take this argument to the absurd, that's like claiming Yzerman is not an all-time great player because he only has one postseason AS (1st team in 99).

Richter was a spectacular goalie, in particular in 90-91, 91-92, 93-94, 95-96 and 96-97. In his first 7 full seasons in the league, he had two average/below average years (92-93, when the Rangers were a complete mess on the ice and in the locker room, and 94-95). Every other year, he was amongst the top goalies in the league. The unceremonious end to his career (similar to another Ranger great - Brian Leetch) has caused people to forget how good he truly was before his (and his team's) decline starting in 97-98.

 

[sr edler]

Richter was fantastic when he was on. Exciting to watch, played a bit like Jonathan Quick.

It's well known that Richter was Quick's favorite player/idol when he grew up so it probably isn't far-fetched to say he modelled his game after him

 

[The Panther]

I gotta go with Richter over Ranford. Ranford was very briefly superhuman in the spring of 1990 and great in the early fall of 1991, but outside of those 9 weeks...? He was merely an above-average starter who lost more games than he won, while receiving no regular season distinctions whatsoever (and none of any kind after age 24).

I think what separates Richter, for me, is that he was great from 1989-90, was still great in the 1996 World Cup (in fact, he was arguably the best player at that whole tournament), and even in 2002 was still picked as the top USA-goalie (and performed very well).

I know Ranford won the '91 MVP for Team Canada, but he only won it because of (a) Gretzky's injury in game two of the Finals (he was walking away with it), and (b) the competition wasn't as tough as in other periods. I think Richter's performance for Team USA in 1996 is at a level Ranford never reached (though you could argue about his heroics against Boston in the '90 Finals).

Anyway, Richter's not a Hall of Famer but I think he would have had a good chance if the Rangers hadn't completely crapped out post-1997.

 

[yukoner88]

At the time I thought the Rangers traded the wrong goalie. Always liked Beezer. And yeah, they were a stellar tandem with both of them essentialy being starting/#1 goalies. Not much consolation having to face either one.

curious question then, do the Rangers still win in 94 if they kept Beezer instead?

 

[brachyrynchos]

curious question then, do the Rangers still win in 94 if they kept Beezer instead?

I think they could've won it with Beezer and I would've liked to have seen the guy get his name on the cup. Was a little bittersweet seeing him traded.

 

[mrhockey193195]

curious question then, do the Rangers still win in 94 if they kept Beezer instead?

It's plausible, but impossible to say one way or the other with confidence. Who knows what small things Richter did, outside of actually stopping pucks, that helped the Rangers win it all? When the margins are that slim, something as simple as a few words said to a certain teammate at a certain practice might actually be the difference.

 

[Langdon Alger]

Great goalie. The save on Bure on the penalty shot in 94 was epic. He along with Messier and Leetch were the main reasons the Rangers won in 94. Graves too. He had a great glove hand if I recall correctly. He got hit in the head with a puck at one point and I think that ended his career.

 

[DannyGallivan]

I remember I heard a lot about him in the 90s, but I hardly ever hear about him nowadays. He was a major factor at the 1996 World Cup of Hockey and he helped the Rangers end a lengthy Cup drought in 1994.

Has Lundqvist made him far less significant?

Personally, I think he was better than Lundqvist.

This is a gross exaggeration.

I don't think it's a gross exaggeration. Not at all. It's certainly debateable, but when he was on he was great.

 

[FerrisRox]

Personally, I think he was better than Lundqvist.

I don't think it's a gross exaggeration. Not at all. It's certainly debateable, but when he was on he was great.

You think Mike Richter had a better career than say, Frank Brimsek?

I don't think theres any debate at all between Richter and Brimsek. Like zero.

He didn't even have a better career than contemporaries like John Vanbiesbrouck or Tom Barrasso. He'd rank below Jonathan Quick. He's closer to the level of someone like Ryan Miller.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I side with Ferris...