View Single Post
07-30-2012, 07:26 PM
Registered User
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 38,788
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
I think the appeal with Niemi is more than that. In all 8? playoff series he has played in, he's "given his team a chance to win" in all of them. The only exception might be the series against LA, where he at least was able to be pulled (Nabokov wouldn't have allowed it), and where he eventually rebounded. He's also stolen a couple of games and had the odd series where he's been a major factor.

It is a relatively small sample size, but that is always how it is going to be.

Nabokov, on the other hand, has/had a mix. Early in his career, he was more like Niemi. But when you factor in the years when he was older and had a heavier workload, it looks like the opposite end of the spectrum. He was costing the team games and series, and wasn't "stealing" very much.

Skill-wise, I think Nabokov hurt the team by his need to see more action to "get comfortable" as well as his (and the two are not unrelated) insistence that players abdicate shooting lanes.
The appeal of Niemi to some is that he's not Nabokov, nothing more. Some people just didn't like Nabokov for whatever reason...some legitimate and some not. But Nabokov gave the Sharks a chance to win every time he stepped on the ice in the playoffs whether people want to admit it or not.

And the criticisms laid against Nabokov ought to be laid against Niemi if the standard was one and the same. However, most people don't stick to one standard when it comes to this conversation. Niemi has done no better here than Nabokov has. That's really the bottom line.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote