View Single Post
Old
11-13-2012, 04:05 PM
  #200
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,770
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
1.) Dead puck era favoured the north/side goalies, Very few teams had east/west elements in their offence. Actually Roberto Luongo had his weakest season since his rookie season - SV% and GAA dropped to their lowest level:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...luongro01.html

Kiprusoff likewise saw his GAA rise despite sustaining his SV% for one season, then dropped below .910 :

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...kiprumi01.html

Brodeur took a season to adapt to the trapezoid rule, anti Brodeur rule, then bounced back:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...brodema01.html

All were impacted by the rule changes.
1. All goalies had their stats go down because scoring went up. We are speaking of relativity here. Raw stats do not reflect relativity.

2. The very next season both Brodeur and Luongo were nominated for the Hart trophy. Yes, players must adapt, but only players with clear deficiencies in their game can't adapt. Which is why, in the big picture, rule changes are irrelevant.

It is a complete rejection of the facts to assume a great player would be unable to adapt to a rule change were it placed in front of them.

It is a complete rejection of the ideals and intentions of this forum and this process to punish a player for elements that are out of their control and any reasonable assessment says they would adapt to.

Considering that the complete history of hockey demonstrates that rule changes have no long term effect on the hierarchy of players, the onus is on you to prove otherwise and you have consistently proven that your position is indefensible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
3.) Why is Charlie Gardiner better than Tiny Thompson? Absolutes without support do not cut it. Gretzky is better than Hawerchuk because of his superior vision, anticipation, appreciation of the horizontal and vertical game. Just three reasons. Step-up with three for Gardiner over Thompson.
1. Voting record. In their 4 seasons where they were both eligible for post season all-star teams, Gardiner got 74 1st place votes. Tiny Thompson got 16.
2. Post season play. Tiny Thompson played on dominant regular season teams that faltered in the playoffs. In an admittedly small sample size (8 rounds.) Gardiner never lost to a lower seeded team and twice beat a team that was better in the regular season.
3. Leadership. Gardiner is the only goalie to ever captain a team to the Stanley Cup.
4. Quick mind. Like his mentor Hugh Lehman, he was able to read plays very quickly and react accordingly.
5. Quick body. Fast glove hand. Fast skater, able to go down and back up quicker than most goalies. Excellent lateral mobility.
6. Aggressive. Would challenge shooters more frequently than his peers. Combined with his speed and ability to read plays, he could do this without putting himself out of position.

There. Six reasons. That should sufficiently demonstrate that Gardiner was so clearly above Thompson that it is a position that should never need to be defended. It honestly makes me question your research into the era that you thought it needed to be defended.

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote