Official Hockey discussion thread

For me, the answer is Roy. Sorry, both teams he won with in Montreal were about as good as Buffalo in the 1990s. No better, surely. He picked those teams up and carried them to Lord Stanley. Hasek couldn't do that. He was a great goalie, one of the best, but he was no Roy.

For reference, I don't think if he was named Bobby and was from Owen Sound it'd make a difference. He's still a first ballot hall of famer. It's just that he didn't win any Cups on a team that wasn't destined to win the Cup.
 
Nigel Tufnel said:
Patrick Roy is the only player to have won the Conn Smythe 3 times. He also was the key player for 4 Stanley Cup teams. He also played and won the Cup in the run n gun era of the 80's, in his rookie year, in Montreal of all places. Plus he revolutionized the position. Player stats really are'nt everything. I really belive that he was the greatest goaltender of all time. Hasek was fun to watch and a great goaltender, but answer this question, who would you have in your net when everything is on the line?
Click to expand...

Hasek.  The only reason he didn't revolutionize the position is that no goaltender has been physically capable of playing like him.  He was unbelievably dominant on mediocre teams.  He was the best in the clutch.  He was the best playoff goalie.  

I'd disagree that Roy was the "key player" on the two Cup-winning Colorado teams he played on.  He was no doubt a piece of the puzzle, and an important one, to be sure, but I don't think he was the clear choice for best player on those teams (unlike his two Cup-winning post-seasons with Montreal, where, unlike in the regular season, he was excellent).  As to revolutionizing the position, I agree that he was a large reason for the league-wide adoption of the butterfly style.  He was clearly the best of those first wave of goalies to employ it (for second, I'd go John Vanbiesbrouck); unlike others whose advantage diminished as others adopted (i.e. Hextall), Roy remained an excellent goalie for the rest of his career.  Ultimately, however, being influential does not count as much as stopping the puck does, and Hasek has a clear advantage in the latter.

LooseCannon said:
For me, the answer is Roy. Sorry, both teams he won with in Montreal were about as good as Buffalo in the 1990s. No better, surely. He picked those teams up and carried them to Lord Stanley. Hasek couldn't do that. He was a great goalie, one of the best, but he was no Roy.
Click to expand...

This is a common myth, imo.  In both seasons, the Habs had won their division the previous year.  The 92-93 Canadiens were atop the standings for most of the season (and finished with more than 100 points), but dropped in the last few weeks due to poor play (including Roy).  Their run to the Cup final was not all that surprising, and not all that difficult (they only lost four games that postseason).  The 85-86 Habs, while not as good, also played poorly down the stretch, which made their final standing a bit deceptive.  Not taking anything away from Roy, as he played extremely well in both post-seasons, but the Cup runs (and the 10 straight OT wins in '93) were as much a product of the Montréal offence.  I'd say both were superior to any team Buffalo iced in the '90s with the exception of '96-97.  Hell, during Hasek's peak, when he won six Vezinas in seven years, Buffalo only finished above 3rd in their own division once.  Hardly the mark of a good team.

The bottom line is: goalies don't win games, teams win games.  
 
I would never take anything away from Roy.
But GP is right about '93 and the '86 Habs were also a top five team.
 
Onhell said:
When Brodeur one the first cup the devils were FAR from a favorite. He was one of those players that emerge as an elite player during his career and was part of making the devils. When Roy won his first cup as a ROOKIE and won his second on a team that wasn't the favorite (everyone thought the pens would three-peat). ONly the Colorado cups was he the final piece of the puzzle.

Hasek was a cup chaser like Hossa, when he won them with detroit. He hardly even worked for it.
Click to expand...

IIRC, Brodeur was playing for league-minimum (or something close to it) when he won his first cup.

I always thought, as goalies go, Brodeur was the outstanding.

However, no one is as good, and as outspoken about it, as Roy.
 
Nigel Tufnel said:
Patrick Roy is the only player to have won the Conn Smythe 3 times. He also was the key player for 4 Stanley Cup teams. He also played and won the Cup in the run n gun era of the 80's, in his rookie year, in Montreal of all places. Plus he revolutionized the position. Player stats really are'nt everything. I really belive that he was the greatest goaltender of all time. Hasek was fun to watch and a great goaltender, but answer this question, who would you have in your net when everything is on the line?
Click to expand...

In answer to this question:

Game 7 Save %:
Hasek .946, Brodeur .928, Belfour .921, Roy .907, Cujo .900

Head-to-head record Game 7s:
Belfour .833, Hasek .667, Cujo .571, Brodeur .500, Roy .462
 
Wasted CLV said:
Wow, Belfour?  I never would have guessed that.  I can't stand that cat.  Love Cujo.
Click to expand...

Belfour's a great goalie, who was great late and in OT, and played for some Dallas teams that were very strong defensively.  In terms of goalies of the modern era, I'd slide him in at third.  Luongo would probably come in at fourth, and Cujo fifth.

The big shame about Cujo is that he spent so much of his career on terrible teams.  If he hung around with St. Louis of the late '90s, he would be a lot higher rated than he is now.
 
In the end it is all about winning. We could argue numbers and stats, but it is not about how many saves a goaltender makes, but when in a game. Just like with goalscorers. Not how many, but when. Not taking anything away from Hasek, but how can anybody argure with Roy having 3 Conn Smythe trophies. Gretzky only has two.
 
And Gretz won 5 cups instead of 3.

If you ask me, I feel like it comes down to wins instead of stats. Stats are great. Wins? Wins are what counts.
 
LooseCannon said:
And Gretz won 5 cups instead of 3.

If you ask me, I feel like it comes down to wins instead of stats. Stats are great. Wins? Wins are what counts.
Click to expand...

Nigel Tufnel said:
In the end it is all about winning. We could argue numbers and stats, but it is not about how many saves a goaltender makes, but when in a game. Just like with goalscorers. Not how many, but when. Not taking anything away from Hasek, but how can anybody argure with Roy having 3 Conn Smythe trophies. Gretzky only has two.
Click to expand...

This is patently false.  Teams win.  Goalies may actively contribute to that.  They might not.

Who's the lead leaguer in wins right now?  This goaltender has the 14th best save percentage, the 31st best goals against average, and 14th in minutes played.  Clearly he is the best in the league.  

Wait a second, a guy who got traded this summer has the same save percentage, and a better GAA.  Why isn't he the best in the league?  I mean statistically, he's superior to the other guy.  Why hasn't he won more games?

Hmm... I'm developing a theory here.  Maybe the first guy isn't any better, but plays for a better team.  Maybe his team is second in his conference, while the other guy's team is 13th.  Maybe that has something to do with it.

It's an incredible double standard that goalies are somehow supposed to singlehandedly win games, but players are not.  Players aren't ranked by the number of games they win.  Observe the statistic of win threshold, which shows how much team effects play in determining wins:

http://brodeurisafraud.blogspot.com/200 ... shold.html

If you play on a good team, you don't have to be good or great to rack up the wins.  There's a reason Osgood has 400 wins.  And it's not because he's a good goalie.  Brodeur's win count is vastly overrated.  He played for a long time on a consistently excellent team, and put forth good to excellent play.  But there's a difference between good goaltending and great goaltending.  From 1993-94 until 2001-02, Dominik Hasek faced 1,060 more shots than Martin Brodeur, and gave up 135 fewer goals.  That's the difference.
 
No, I agree with the statement that Hasek is better than Brodeur. Brodeur wasn't on a good defensive team; he was on the best defensive team. He's still an excellent goalie.

However, while a team wins a Stanley Cup, you simply do not win the Stanley Cup with a goalie who plays poorly. You can win with an average goalie on a hot streak or a spectacular goalie playing mediocre, but you don't win with a goalie who plays bad hockey. That's not true for any other position.

The goaltender position is, bar none, the biggest make or break position in hockey. That's why goalies have boatloads of Conn Smythes in relevance to their per capita makeup of championship teams.
 
LooseCannon said:
No, I agree with the statement that Hasek is better than Brodeur. Brodeur wasn't on a good defensive team; he was on the best defensive team. He's still an excellent goalie.

However, while a team wins a Stanley Cup, you simply do not win the Stanley Cup with a goalie who plays poorly. You can win with an average goalie on a hot streak or a spectacular goalie playing mediocre, but you don't win with a goalie who plays bad hockey. That's not true for any other position.

The goaltender position is, bar none, the biggest make or break position in hockey. That's why goalies have boatloads of Conn Smythes in relevance to their per capita makeup of championship teams.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call Brodeur an excellent goalie.  He's had two excellent stretches in his career, but overall I'd settle on "very good".  

As for your second point, lets look at the last ten years.  Because I don't know whether you're right.  I'd agree that goalie is the most important position in hockey; however, I'd say that this sentiment is believed in with too much conviction, and that is why goalies have more Conne Smythes.  But I digress.

Year        Average Sv%        Winning save %                    +/-
2010        0.908                     0.910 - Niemi                     +0.002
2009        0.915                     0.908 - Fleury                    -0.007
2008        0.914                     0.930 - Osgood                  +0.016      
2007        0.919                     0.922 - Giguere                  +0.003      
2006        0.906                     0.920 - Ward                      +0.014
2004        0.922                     0.933 - Khabibulin               +0.011
2003        0.919                     0.934 - Brodeur                  +0.015
2002        0.918                     0.920 - Hasek                     +0.002                            
2001        0.912                     0.934 - Roy                        +0.022
2000        0.918                     0.927 - Brodeur                  +0.009

Well, it certainly looks like better than average goaltending helps.  Only one goaltender is less than their playoff average; Fleury.  Just by looking at the numbers, there were 3 of what I'd call "very good" performances (0.014-0.018+; Osgood, Ward, Brodeur) and one "excellent" one (0.018-0.022; Roy).  There is another good one, and then three more or less inconsequential ones, and a bad one.  I think this shows that good goaltending definitely helps; but far from a dominant one is necessary if you have proper goal support.

EDIT: Actually, I should have noted that the listed goalies were rarely the ones with the best save percentage overall; typically those goalies were knocked out in earlier rounds.  Goal support is more important on the whole I'd say.
 
I don't know... Take the '04 Oilers. Had Roloson NOT gotten hurt I KNOW they would have won the Cup. Instead, because Conklin choked and Markannen played OK, they lost...
 
That looked like a real hockey trade.
It would be nice to see those making a comeback.
 
There's been a few decent trades so far. Colorado and Ottawa switching goalies says a lot for how Anderson has underperformed this season; unfortunate, because he was on fire last year.
 
Boston has made major moves and FINALLY (after years of rumors) acquired Kabrele, but lost a top prospect in the process, talk about faith in the guy...
 
Kaberle is a good pickup for them. Combined with Kelly; I think they have a decent shot. Especially if Timmy T. keeps playing this way.

For reference, I think Timmy T. is fantastic!
 
The way the stretch is shaping up my Cup finalists are: EAST: Philly or Boston vs. WEST: Vancouver or (FINALLY) San Jose.

The West, as always, is a harder call, but any other team from the east than those I picked I will consider huge surprises.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top