HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Polls - (hockey-related only) (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=72)
-   -   How many of Brodeur's Vezinas did he deserve to win (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=589888)

wildone26* 01-01-2009 10:07 PM

How many of Brodeur's Vezinas did he deserve to win
 
I am curious to get a survey of the opinions on something. How many of Brodeur's 4 Vezina's do you believe he deserved to win. I voted for 2 out of 4. Luongo was robbed in 2004 to be sure, and I thought Nabakov was last year. I agreed with his other two however.

haakon84 01-01-2009 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nashfan24 (Post 17092880)
I am curious to get a survey of the opinions on something. How many of Brodeur's 4 Vezina's do you believe he deserved to win. I voted for 2 out of 4. Luongo was robbed in 2004 to be sure, and I thought Nabakov was last year. I agreed with his other two however.

Please give me one reason how Nabokov was "robbed" last year?
Quote:

Originally Posted by haakon84
Brodeur allowed 5 more goals while facing 280+ more shots than Nabokov.

I don't see how you can say it's Nabokov unless you are just tired of Brodeur winning it.

More fun stats:
In losses...

Nabokov:
3.22 .872
24 shots faced per game
1.84 goals forwarded by San Jose


Brodeur:
2.81 .897
27 shots faced per game
.97 goals forwarded by New Jersey

San Jose was shutout only 1 time when Nabokov started.
New Jersey was shutout 11 times

San Jose scored a goal or less 11 times for Nabokov.
New Jersey scored a goal or less 26 times for Brodeur.


rt 01-01-2009 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nashfan24 (Post 17092880)
I am curious to get a survey of the opinions on something. How many of Brodeur's 4 Vezina's do you believe he deserved to win. I voted for 2 out of 4. Luongo was robbed in 2004 to be sure, and I thought Nabakov was last year. I agreed with his other two however.

All four.

vwg* 01-01-2009 10:16 PM

All 4. He's a great goalie.

WarriorOfGandhi 01-01-2009 10:31 PM

Three of them IMO

03, there wasn't really anyone else to compete with. Hasek had retired, Roy and Belfour played a dozen fewer games, Turco and Kipper only put in half a season.

04, Luongo should've won it. I hate to use the "he's on a bad team" cliché but Luongo kept ahead of Brodeur the entire season with the exception of the win-loss tally, which was more a reflection of the respective teams they played behind.

07, Brodeur stopped more rubber and did it in a harder conference with less offensive and defensive support

08, Nabokov's only real claim to the Vezina was two more wins, which is practically an argument for Brodeur considering how much better the Sharks were offensively and defensively compared to the Devils

Interestingly (in my opinion, at least) that the argument for Brodeur's "fraudery" -- or whatever it's called -- before the lockout is really an argument for him post-lockout. New Jersey has lost considerable talent yet keeps on truckin'.

Fire Brunet* 01-01-2009 10:36 PM

How can you win a Vezina if you don't deserve it? :huh:

Luongo2008* 01-01-2009 10:57 PM

All 4.

CrosbyCrosby* 01-01-2009 11:09 PM

3. Luongo got robbed.

The Big Swede 01-01-2009 11:21 PM

All of them

Lone Rogue 01-02-2009 12:21 AM

He deserved all four but 2004 could have gone either way, to be honest. I had a tough time deciding myself.

Saw Jiris Tlusty 01-02-2009 12:37 AM

All 4. Luongo will get more so 2004 won't be such a bad pill to swallow.

TheDanceOfMaternity 01-02-2009 12:57 AM

The sharks were a horrible team last year without Nabokov. Every single player was worse than the year before, and they were legitimately perhaps the most predictable team in pro sports. At the trade deadline when they got Campbell, they could have just as easily traded Marleau among others away and became sellers instead (or aimed for a bottom playoff seed with more draft picks for the future). Yes the devils do not have Joe Thornton, who scored like 1/3 of the team's points, but Nabokov was the team, period. Brodeur had a great season, but I don't recall him making a dozen ridiculous saves on every start. At least the team in front of him knew what they were doing.

There's a reason the stats thing doesn't fly with people who watched Nabokov last year.

Kamina 01-02-2009 01:10 AM

Three.

Big Phil 01-02-2009 01:39 AM

I said three personally. He deserved '03 and '04 IMO. And at the end of the day '07 is a closer debate than '04. Then in '08 he won it and wasnt even a first team all-star, Nabokov was. So while I can't say he didnt "deserve" them, you aren't far off if you think either one of the '07 or '08 wins were close and could have gone either way

monster_bertuzzi 01-02-2009 01:57 AM

Luongo was robbed more-so in 2007 than 2004.

haakon84 01-02-2009 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDanceOfMaternity (Post 17094770)
The sharks were a horrible team last year without Nabokov. Every single player was worse than the year before, and they were legitimately perhaps the most predictable team in pro sports. At the trade deadline when they got Campbell, they could have just as easily traded Marleau among others away and became sellers instead (or aimed for a bottom playoff seed with more draft picks for the future). Yes the devils do not have Joe Thornton, who scored like 1/3 of the team's points, but Nabokov was the team, period. Brodeur had a great season, but I don't recall him making a dozen ridiculous saves on every start. At least the team in front of him knew what they were doing.

There's a reason the stats thing doesn't fly with people who watched Nabokov last year.

Sharks were no where near a terrible team last year. Did you watch Brodeur? He made game changing saves every night. Look no further than his game against San Jose (oh and check the score, if I recall the Devils won 2-1)



or during his 500th victory against Philly which was the save of the year IMO



Look at those stats I posted 26 games with a goal or less. The team lived and died by his performance.

There is no reason for any Nabokov fan to feel he was robbed.

Darius Dangleaitis 01-02-2009 02:11 AM

All four, haters.

Clowe Me 01-02-2009 02:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by haakon84 (Post 17095171)
Sharks were no where near a terrible team last year. Did you watch Brodeur? He made game changing saves every night. Look no further than his game against San Jose (oh and check the score, if I recall the Devils won 2-1)

The first 50 games or so Joe and Nabby carried the team while Marleau, Cheechoo, Michalek, Pavelski and company struggled play and point wise.

That NJ/SJ game was 3-2 but should've went to OT. (Roenick scored with like 30 seconds left but ref was in horrible position and lost sight of the puck.)

karnige 01-02-2009 02:23 AM

3 imo

haakon84 01-02-2009 02:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArcticSharkie (Post 17095264)
The first 50 games or so Joe and Nabby carried the team while Marleau, Cheechoo, Michalek, Pavelski and company struggled play and point wise.

That NJ/SJ game was 3-2 but should've went to OT. (Roenick scored with like 30 seconds left but ref was in horrible position and lost sight of the puck.)

Well guess I don't recall correctly but I do remember it being a timely save as the Devils increased their lead to 3-1 less than 2 minutes later. Regardless no statistical analysis shows Nabokov being robbed. Lost a close one? Sure, but to say he was robbed is ridiculous. Especially when you consider that both teams relied equally on their goaltender.

Clowe Me 01-02-2009 02:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by haakon84 (Post 17095321)
Well guess I don't recall correctly but I do remember it being a timely save as the Devils increased their lead to 3-1 less than 2 minutes later. Regardless no statistical analysis shows Nabokov being robbed. Lost a close one? Sure, but to say he was robbed is ridiculous. Especially when you consider that both teams relied equally on their goaltender.

I dont think he was robbed. I was just commenting on the game between the teams last year. Honestly IMO they both deserved it. Thats why the voting was as close as it was. Brodeur got the nod because he deserved it and has been consistent every single year for the last 15 or so. The thing that gets me is people pointing out 1 stat of Nabokov's (SV %) and trying to discredit his entire season or his importance to the team when he was a rock last year.

haakon84 01-02-2009 02:42 AM

Actually my stats were off the Devilss scored a goal or less in 28 games I didn't check 2-1 SO wins as 1 goal games.

haakon84 01-02-2009 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArcticSharkie (Post 17095349)
I dont think he was robbed. I was just commenting on the game between the teams last year. Honestly IMO they both deserved it. Thats why the voting was as close as it was. Brodeur got the nod because he deserved it and has been consistent every single year for the last 15 or so. The thing that gets me is people pointing out 1 stat of Nabokov's (SV %) and trying to discredit his entire season or his importance to the team when he was a rock last year.

Right I understand your gripe about save %, trust me I've been through those arguments and people still try to discredit Brodeur's earlier seasons because of his mediocre save %.

But the Devils offense was miserable last season and Brodeur carried that team.

36% of the games he started he had 1 goal or less in offensive support.

11 times they were shutout and 17 times they scored 1 goal.

I don't think people realize how incredible it was a season for him or any goaltender.

Rob Nieds work ethic 01-02-2009 04:27 AM

:biglaugh:

All four of them.

But don't worry, Luongo will never even get close to Brodeur.

ILikeItVeryMuch* 01-02-2009 05:23 AM

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/9/146...80cc0f7a_o.jpg
Move along.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:39 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.