Is Marc Andre Fleury a HOFer? and if so when did he become one?

[Peter Tosh]

Vezina sealed the deal

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I know it's a regular season award, but being unceremoniously benched multiple times in the playoffs and later dumped after the regular season Vezina looks bad.

The award should have gone to Vasilevskiy anyway.

Not many goalies are 36 years old when they win the Vezina. It's a longer season for the old guys.

Rhinne was 35 when he won it and he sucked in the playoffs that year too.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Based on the HOF's strict guidelines toward goalies, he shouldn't make it.

if the bar is roy, hasek, and brodeur then MAF is way short. but if the bar is cheevers and vachon? he doesn’t look that far off does he?

 

[MadLuke]

Luongo went 230 GSAA in his prime, .930 ev sv%, completely alone with Brodeur in volume played, that top 10 are easy in:
[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TH]Rank[/TH]
[TH]Player[/TH]
[TH]Years[/TH]
[TH]GSAA[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1.[/TD]
[TD]Tony Esposito*[/TD]
[TD]1968-84[/TD]
[TD]498[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2.[/TD]
[TD]Patrick Roy*[/TD]
[TD]1984-03[/TD]
[TD]461[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3.[/TD]
[TD]Dominik Hasek*[/TD]
[TD]1990-08[/TD]
[TD]413[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]4.[/TD]
[TD]Bernie Parent*[/TD]
[TD]1965-79[/TD]
[TD]321[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]5.[/TD]
[TD]Ken Dryden*[/TD]
[TD]1970-79[/TD]
[TD]317[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]6.[/TD]
[TD]Jacques Plante*[/TD]
[TD]1952-73[/TD]
[TD]297[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]7.[/TD]
[TD]Roberto Luongo*[/TD]
[TD]1999-19[/TD]
[TD]270[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]8.[/TD]
[TD]Glenn Hall*[/TD]
[TD]1952-71[/TD]
[TD]239[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]9.[/TD]
[TD]Billy Smith*[/TD]
[TD]1971-89[/TD]
[TD]231[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]10.[/TD]
[TD]Martin Brodeur*[/TD]
[TD]1991-15[/TD]
[TD]207[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

The stats is completely unfair and bad (about at the same rare than looking at points are), but still there is a certain level that it would be hard to keep you out.

Fleury is an interesting case, not only very high high but many of them, at the same time so many first round exit where you feel his teams with an HOF goaltender would have succeeded.

Fleury will retire with the second most wins, played mostly in the no tie era but still, maybe third in playoff wins, had a smythe worthy Vegas playoff run, '3' cup winner (still signifcant part of 2 cup win) + 2 finals, all around very liked guy, Vezina...

It is a long C.V. and in an era that goaltender played a lot of musical chair, just having been almost an constant in the league for so long will distinguish him from his contemporary. He has played around 300 more nhl games than any others active goaltenders.

How better-constant at stopping puck was he to Vokoun ? But that how the career lottery goes.

 

[GMR]

if the bar is roy, hasek, and brodeur then MAF is way short. but if the bar is cheevers and vachon? he doesn’t look that far off does he?

That's a fair point. Cheevers was inducted a long time ago. Vachon was more recent and possibly opened the door for Vernon, MAF, Joseph, Barrasso. I know many posters weren't thrilled with Vachon's induction.

 

[JianYang]

He’s third in all-time wins atm, within firing distance from Roy. His career is long and successful with some really memorable moments. Denying Lidstrom to tie the game up in the dying seconds of 2009 game 7 is one of those immortal goalie moments. And yes, he’s popular as a personality, which helps.

Was never really regarded as one of the very best goalies in the game and I get why many are on the fence with him as a HoF candidate, but his style was more entertaining than Lundqvist and Price.

Yeah, the finals run with Vegas plus the Vezina is what seals the deal for him.

I think he gets in.

I don't think he's one of the all time greats, but he got longevity on his side, and being at the right places and the right time.

 

[dalewood12]

MAF's regular season stats lean towards "Yes."

The one hole in his resume are the very poor playoff performances between 2010 and 2014, especially in 2012 and 2013 where he was atrocious. Beach balls were getting past him. Second perhaps to only Bylsma, MAF was a key reason the Pens didn't get another Cup during Crosby and Malkin's peak.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

That's a fair point. Cheevers was inducted a long time ago. Vachon was more recent and possibly opened the door for Vernon, MAF, Joseph, Barrasso. I know many posters weren't thrilled with Vachon's induction.

i was just thinking, upthread someone mentioned that roy/hasek/brodeur really skewed our goalposts for what the hall of fame threshold should be for goalies and i wanted to test that against other generations.

the real interesting generation for me is that sawchuk/plante/hall cohort. they were inducted in 1971, '75, and '78, respectively. sawchuk so early because he died and they waived the waiting period, and plante so late because he had that brief WHA comeback. bower was inducted in 1976, between hall and plante, and after plante were lumley and worsley, both in 1980. it's absolutely bizarre that six of the thirty best goalies of all time all were born within seven years of each other and overlapped, even if i believe there's only one year (1960) when they were the six starters all at the same time. but my point is, if in a six team league the hall saw fit to see beyond the three top five guys and still induct their non-greatest of the greats contemporaries, then maybe we will come to see that the guys below belfour who overlapped with roy/hasek/brodeur can have their due. i think in this comparison, bower is like belfour (ie a no-brainer), and if there's been a lumley and a worsley, the hall hasn't seen fit to induct them yet (say, barrasso or beezer or cujo).

whether MAF belongs there, i don't know, tbh. but he doesn't look super out of place against the 70s guys at least.

 

[Staniowski]

I think the biggest issues with goalies and the Hall of Fame are that they have fewer awards (that the Selection Committee probably largely bases their votes on), etc. and also most people are unsure of how to deal with most of their career "numbers"....wins, save percentage, etc.

Fleury should be okay, because he's got the Cups, the Vezina, and is almost at the top in career wins.

Cujo, on the other hand, has virtually nothing for awards, etc., even though he was a really good goalie.

 

[Neutrinos]

Fleury is 4th all-time in games played for goalies with 978, yet, is 49th all-time in GSAA with 71.1

He has a career playoff GSAA of -23.4

For comparison's sake:

Jaroslav Halak has played 576 games, but has a career GSAA of 74.2

And his career playoff GSAA is 3

 

[Stephen]

MAF started his HHOF worthy career the moment he was drafted 1st overall. He might not be a high flying all time great type of HHOFer at a Roy, Brodeur level but it is the framework for his unique legacy and pretty complete resume.

 

[Sentinel]

Yes, quite comfortably too.

 

[WarriorofTime]

First Ballot, no question

 

[LightningStorm]

Pretty much. He's an "accumulator" like so many players this board deems unworthy of the HOF.

The debate is "whether" he should make it. He'll most certainly get inducted.

Accumulator is a great way to put it. I've seen this board call many forwards "compilers" who accumulated points simply by playing for a long time but never having a great peak. MAF is the goalie version of that.

 

[seventieslord]

Accumulator is a great way to put it. I've seen this board call many forwards "compilers" who accumulated points simply by playing for a long time but never having a great peak. MAF is the goalie version of that.

In some ways, yes (gp, wins, etc). But what about individually?

if points are the best simple indicator of a forward's performance (and points are just quality of play - PPG - times workload - GP), then GSAA can be said to be the same for goalies.

You can't "compile" save percentage since it's an averaging stat, but GSAA is a counting stat as it multiples quality of play (sv% vs league average) by workload (minutes or GP), so it is something that can be compiled to a higher number over time.

Has Fleury "compiled" enough GSAA over the years to be a HHOF goaltender in the way that Dave Andreychuk (and probably Patrick Marleau) compiled enough points to be HHOF forwards?

I don't know the answer, actually, because I don't have the career GSAA leaders in front of me, but my gut says no.

 

[MadLuke]

At least with GSAA unlike points:

You can lose them with "bad" season
And for achieving zero and maintening your GSAA you need to be around starting nhl goaltender good (not sure if first line forward is a perfect equivalent) but it is certainly an really high level and valuable level of play.

Would you loose points for season you scored at a lesser rate than say the Top 50 best scorer in the league and gain them only when you are better than the 50th best, points would not be something being simply a compiler would let you rack.

 

[seventieslord]

At least with GSAA unlike points:

You can lose them with "bad" season
And for achieving zero and maintening your GSAA you need to be around starting nhl goaltender good (not sure if first line forward is a perfect equivalent) but it is certainly an really high level and valuable level of play.

Would you loose points for season you scored at a lesser rate than say the Top 50 best scorer in the league and gain them only when you are better than the 50th best, points would not be something being simply a compiler would let you rack.

Yes, that's all correct, of course.

 

[Retire91]

He's in the hall of Osgood.

I am sure there are examples of people in the hall that would argue he belongs but to me he didn't quite change the game or stand out in a way you would like to see an inductee. My opinion. He has hardware, championships, stats. But did he really carve out a legacy that separated him from the pack? Same feelings as Osgood for me.

Wow didn't realize he is so close to 1000 games played.

I could see him getting in though just from his resume boosted by popularity.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Hopefully I can present a stat without a certain poster complaining about how I haven't accounted for the curvature of the earth.

That being said - in this post, I talk about goals saved versus threshold. This recognizes that there's value in being average for a long time (ie being, on average, the 15th best goalie in the world for 10-15 years is impressive, even if that gives you a goals versus average of roughly zero).

Based on that method, Fleury ranks 13th "all-time" (going back to the mid 1950's). 14 of the top 15 goalies on the list are, or will be, in the Hall. The only exception is John Vanbiesbrouck - and Fleury has more longevity, much more team success, and Beezer had one ugly racist (alleged?) incident that hurts his reputation. That's the best statistical argument that can be made for Fleury - that he was an average goalie for a very long time, and there's real value in that. (If nothing else, it prevents his team from having to play a below-average goalie).

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Hopefully I can present a stat without a certain poster complaining about how I haven't accounted for the curvature of the earth.

That being said - in this post, I talk about goals saved versus threshold. This recognizes that there's value in being average for a long time (ie being, on average, the 15th best goalie in the world for 10-15 years is impressive, even if that gives you a goals versus average of roughly zero).

Based on that method, Fleury ranks 13th "all-time" (going back to the mid 1950's). 14 of the top 15 goalies on the list are, or will be, in the Hall. The only exception is John Vanbiesbrouck - and Fleury has more longevity, much more team success, and Beezer had one ugly racist (alleged?) incident that hurts his reputation. That's the best statistical argument that can be made for Fleury - that he was an average goalie for a very long time, and there's real value in that. (If nothing else, it prevents his team from having to play a below-average goalie).

Yes, there is value. But the HOF isn't for excelling at being average. The HOF is for the best of the best.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Yes, there is value. But the HOF isn't for excelling at being average. The HOF is for the best of the best.

For the record, I agree. If I had a vote, Fleury wouldn't be in the Hall. The threshold should be excellence, rather than being above average for a long time. And he probably cost the Pens some deep playoff runs with a string of terrible playoff performances in the early 2010's. But, trying to play devil's advocate, the argument I put forward is probably the best statistical case that one of his supporters could make.

 

[Albatros]

Barrasso > Fleury. Barrasso has five top three Vezina seasons. Fleury just the one (when he won it). Playoffs it is Barrasso. That being said, I think both should get in.

Just so as a meaningless little provocation NHL career save percentages among goalies of their own draft classes:

1983
1. Dominik Hašek .922
2. Darren Puppa .897
3. Bob Essensa .895
4. Chris Terreri .892
5. Tom Barrasso .892

2003
1. Corey Crawford .918
2. Jaroslav Halák .915
3. Marc-André Fleury .913
4. Jimmy Howard .912
5. Brian Elliott .910

 

[Crosby2010]

He is getting in, yes. His teams played in 5 Cup finals. Three of them he was the sole starter. In 2016 he was hurt for most of the playoffs and many can say that was Murray's Cup, but keep in mind Fleury played 58 games in the regular season. The next year they split the regular season and split the playoffs too. Fleury was a major foe against the Caps in 2017, just like 2009. Also finished well in his first two years in Vegas for the Vezina trophy. Didn't play enough games in 2018, other than that I am surprised he didn't get some Hart trophy votes. When Crosby and Malkin were hurt in 2011 Fleury finished 9th in Hart trophy voting. I think when he won the Vezina in 2021 it sealed the deal for him, even in a shortened year, and even though he had that awful cough up that gifted the Habs the tying goal in Game 3 of the semifinal. People forget just how miraculous he was against the Avs the round prior.

His numbers and the teams he played for in the regular season were not built around him having gaudy GAA. He was the guy you were confident you could play a run and gun game while he was in net. Very Fuhr-like that way. He did have some playoff boners after 2009. Honestly, I think he did more than enough to make up for them. It was 2010, 2012 and 2013. That's it. He wasn't awful in 2011. Had a shutout in Game 7 in 2019 before the awful call heard round the world. Probably should have still won the game, but either way. But like I said, I never thought he was the goalie in search of those big stats, just the wins. Which he never stopped getting. He also made probably the biggest save in NHL history, that helps. 73 shutouts, 542 wins which is 3rd all-time, and so far tied with the 3rd highest playoff wins. How do you not put him in?

 

[CrosbyIsKing87]

I am a bit biased because I am a Penguins fan and I really like Fleury. But I would say yes. His career numbers are very good to great. He only has one Vezina and one Jennings but in this era it seems like you just don't have goalies that rack those up like before. Price only has one of those. Fleury's weakness is his inconsistency at certain times in his career and high profile gaffes. In the 2008 playoffs he was amazing, 2009 he got a ring. In 2011 he was kind of average and 2012 he was terrible. 2013 he rebounded. Then Murray took over but he won a couple of key series for the Pens in 2017. Then in 2018 he was THE biggest reason why the Golden Knights went as far as they did. He carried that team and his stats were ridiculous. Wins a Vezina in 2021 but big gaffe in the playoffs that year. I would vote for him. He may not match up with guys like Brodeur, Hasek, Roy but in the post 2005 lockout era he was an elite goalie.

 

[markymarc1215]

I think his tenure in Vegas pushed him well over the borderline and into the HHOF. Include being a former 1OA, a cup saving stop for the ages, and very popular, and this is a slam dunk. Fleury had his struggles here and there, but so did every other goalie in the HHOF. Based on his resume, I dont think there is any doubt about it.