Duhatschek...Snubbed:The Hall of Fame case for Mike Vernon

[transplant99]

Just another great article by the master of NHL coverage.

Ultimately, Bowman’s decision to go with Vernon got the Red Wings over the hump in 1997. Detroit won and Vernon’s stat line in that postseason – a 16-4 record and a 1.76 goals-against average – earned him the Conn Smythe Trophy as the NHL’s playoff MVP.

When the pressure ramped up, Vernon was capable of rising to the occasion. It was a trait that he also demonstrated against Grant Fuhr, one of the other members of that generation’s goaltending elite. Fuhr and Vernon were junior rivals and then mainstays for their respective teams during the most competitive years of the Battle of Alberta.

Before Vernon arrived in Calgary, the Oilers dominated the Flames – and made a lot of very good goalies look very bad. Vernon was a rare exception. Lifetime, against Edmonton, he played great.

From the time Vernon made his NHL debut as a junior call-up on Dec. 12, 1982, until his final NHL appearance on April 13, 2002, he earned the second-most regular-season wins among all goaltenders in that span:

Vernon sits at No. 16 on the all-time NHL goaltender wins list, with 385. But he also completed his career with 92 regular-season ties. If he played in the current era, where every game reaches a decision – win or loss – he could easily have added an extra 50 victories or more to his career total.

Kevin Weekes, the NHL Network analyst and former goalie, describes Vernon as “the forgotten, high-level, elite goalie of that generation – and I believe he has Hall of Fame credentials for sure. Talk to anybody from Calgary in ’89 or Detroit in ’97 and they will tell you the same thing.”

“To play as well as he did in the Battle of Alberta, at that time, with all those guys that Edmonton had – and then to win a Cup in Calgary – that’s crazy,” Weekes said. “That’s nuts. Then to go to Detroit and win again – yeah, he’s for sure a Hall of Famer. But it’s so interesting because people hardly ever talk about him.”

You can’t go back in time and redo a Conn Smythe vote – or amend the rules relating to ties or overtime results.

But you can evaluate players against their peers, within the statistical context of the eras in which they played. Against the two Hall of Famers that he faced time and time again, Vernon emerged with the edge over both Fuhr and Roy. Both are in the Hall of Fame – and belong there.

Vernon does too.

It's a farce he isn't in the HOF already.

https://theathletic.com/1809037/

[chockfullofgoodness]

How Vernon isn't in the HOF is a complete joke. He definitely has the stats to be there and yet every year he gets snubbed.

[dissentowner]

Both him and Fleury should be in the HOF, ridiculous they are not.

https://theathletic.com/1807098/2020...r-theo-fleury/

[Resolute 14]

I've always maintained that Mike Vernon was a better goaltender than Grant Fuhr. Especially when it mattered most. They both should be in the Hall.

[agulati]

I’m enjoying these snubbed articles on the athletic.

[Funkhouser]

Its funny, I was too young to really watch him actively during his time in Calgary...and due to the commentary of people around me, always assumed him to be a poor goalie. Even when his jersey was retired above folks like Macinnis, I always assumed that it was due to the fact he was a local boy.

Reading the article makes me wish I had watched him more actively. Duha makes a pretty compelling case. Ditto for Fleury.

[troutman]

Sometimes I wonder if he rubbed some people the wrong way, but Fuhr and Roy could be flakes too.

[Flashpoint]

If Mike Richter is in there, Vernon should be.

Edit - he isn’t so nvm!

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

If Mike Richter is in there, Vernon should be.

Edit - he isn’t so nvm!

He is in the U.S. Hockey Hall of Fame. Probably what you were thinking.

I don't know if I could make a slam dunk case for Vernon to be honest. He was a great goalie, but I don't think he was ever considered the best in the league for any window of time when he played. He was often in the top 5, but he never won a Vezina or was a first team all-star.

[tvp2003]

The head-to-head stats were eye-opening for me. I know that's not really the criteria, but if you look at the quality of the player, I think a case can definitely be made.

Eric also makes a great point about goalies being underrepresented in the HHOF. And I agree the Vernie would be at the top of that list.

[Bleeding Red]

The only past goalie on the selection committee is the Chair - John Davidson.
Also, it seems to me like the HHOF has a bit of an eastern bias.

I once contacted many committee members - only heard back from Duha, and he refused to discuss any aspect of the selection process. It is kept confidential upon pain of dismissal.

Fleury has a serious case beyond just NHL numbers, and I reiterated that to them. Vernon has a serious case because of his NHL numbers.

(my only issue with Vernon is two goals that got past him, odd angle high glove side.)

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

He is in the U.S. Hockey Hall of Fame. Probably what you were thinking.

I don't know if I could make a slam dunk case for Vernon to be honest. He was a great goalie, but I don't think he was ever considered the best in the league for any window of time when he played. He was often in the top 5, but he never won a Vezina or was a first team all-star.

Just because a player plays in an era where there is someone better than him at his position, should not disqualify that player from being considered ones of the great ones at his position.

Simple analogy but that kind of thinking would disqualify Lemieux because he played mot of his career the same time Gretzky did. What if they had started the same year?

Honestly if Vernons resume isn't HOF worthy, I'm not sure we see very many more G's ever get in. Being its the single most important position in the game (in that you cannot win without it), that doesn't make very much sense.

[Sainters7]

Originally Posted by Funkhouser

Its funny, I was too young to really watch him actively during his time in Calgary...and due to the commentary of people around me, always assumed him to be a poor goalie. Even when his jersey was retired above folks like Macinnis, I always assumed that it was due to the fact he was a local boy.

Reading the article makes me wish I had watched him more actively. Duha makes a pretty compelling case. Ditto for Fleury.

Yeah this is me to an extent. I definitely remember him as a Flame, but I was too young for the 80s and just remember the 90s version of him and the Flames, when they'd have strong regular seasons and then choke in the first round every year. So I never really saw him as this clutch goalie, more just a good one who'd always get outdueled by the other goalie in the playoffs (Ranford, Hrudey, McLean). I never considered him an HoFer before.

The article makes me realize I probably just missed peak Flames Vernon in the 80s. That glove save in game 7 OT against Van is an all-timer. And I definitely saw what he did with the Wings in 97 too. Duha makes a strong case here, making me reconsider things.

[looooob]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I don't know if I could make a slam dunk case for Vernon to be honest. He was a great goalie, but I don't think he was ever considered the best in the league for any window of time when he played. He was often in the top 5, but he never won a Vezina or was a first team all-star.

it seems like this might be a standard we only hold goalies to though? now I think the Vernon case for the HHOF is not a slam dunk- but I get the argument - especially because the HHOF seems to put a premium on playoffs and Stanleys and he did his part there and matched up well with the big dogs of his era (Fuhr, Roy)


but anyways to the statements above we could insert the names (all more or less contemporaries of Vernon) Federko, Nieuwendyk, Gartner, Anderson , Ciccarelli, Andreychuk, Carbonneau etc.....probably many others...now sure I could see the argument 'these guys shouldn't be in the HOF either- fair enough, but yet here we are at other positions guys who were never- or rarely - 2nd team allstars, or top 5 forwards, or major award winners are frequently in the Hall

[getbak]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

He was a great goalie, but I don't think he was ever considered the best in the league for any window of time when he played.

If we held every position to that standard, there would only be two centremen in the HHOF who played in the 1980s.


Look at these guys...

• Dale Hawerchuk was never a first team All-Star and the only NHL Award he ever won was the Calder.
  
  
• Doug Gilmour was never a first or second team All-Star and the only individual award he ever won was the Selke.
  
  
• Joe Nieuwendyk was never a first or second team All-Star. He won the Calder, Clancy, and Smythe trophies.
  
  
• Denis Savard made the second All-Star team once in his career, and that was the only individual honour he ever received.

I've never seen anyone suggest that these guys don't belong in the HHOF.


I'd say that Nieuwendyk and Vernon had very similar careers for their positions (even winning the Conn Smythe for their second Cup wins).

[troutman]

If Eric is on the Committee, is it ok for him to be campaigning for Vernon?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by troutman

If Eric is on the Committee, is it ok for him to be campaigning for Vernon?

He is no longer on it.

His tenure expired last year.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by troutman

If Eric is on the Committee, is it ok for him to be campaigning for Vernon?

He hasn't been on the committee since November 2018.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Just because a player plays in an era where there is someone better than him at his position, should not disqualify that player from being considered ones of the great ones at his position.

Simple analogy but that kind of thinking would disqualify Lemieux because he played mot of his career the same time Gretzky did. What if they had started the same year?

Honestly if Vernons resume isn't HOF worthy, I'm not sure we see very many more G's ever get in. Being its the single most important position in the game (in that you cannot win without it), that doesn't make very much sense.

I think there is a different standard for goalies just due to the fact that there are far fewer that play. From the 1980s until now, there are a maximum of 20 to 30 that play the majority of games for any given team during a season. If you applied the same standard for forwards and defensemen, the HoF would be pretty bare.

I can't comment on the pre-1980s goalies, but for the rest, it looks like most were considered the best among their peers at some point during their career.

[looooob]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I can't comment on the pre-1980s goalies, but for the rest, it looks like most were considered the best among their peers at some point during their career.

and there I think Fuhr is a really interesting comparison. both guys won a Jennings (stat based) trophy, interestingly in both cases after leaving Alberta


each won one major personal award (Vernon Smyth, Fuhr Vezina)


Fuhr won his Vezina in 87-88 as best I can tell mostly because he played a crap load of games (75) and won a decent amount of them. his GAA and Sav PCT that year was very middling (mid 20s in the league) but he had the aura at that point of the guy who 'made enough saves to win'... Vernon's closest Vezina result was the next year where he finished second to Roy- I think Vernon's stats in 88-89 probably better than Fuhr 87-88 but with a more modest workload


in fact of the 13 goalies who got Vezina votes in 87-88 its possible that Fuhr and Vernon (along perhaps with Hextall) actually were the 3 worst statistically (realizing that stats don't tell the whole story for goalies- especially the stats we had at our disposal then). probably the best goalies in the league that year were Roy, Barasso and Beezer (Hrudey and Lemelin up there too!)



now it is true Fuhr seems to pop up more than Vernon in the sort of top 5 Vezina appearances etc