View Single Post
12-12-2012, 02:31 PM
Student Of The Game
seventieslord's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 30,353
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
If you include the complete body of work Cheevers is well ahead of Giacomin and Esposito:

Cheevers had a winning record while facing better competition. Look at Esposito's and Cheevers sv% in SC finals and deciding games and Esposito pales badly.
Go ahead and do that, then. I bet it's not as big a difference as you think.

Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
That sounds like a shortcut around a lot of context.
That's exactly what it is.

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
The impression I get is that Tony Esposito was usually above average in the playoffs, but above average was still a drop from his regular season play. And in both his Stanley Cup finals, he bombed, which is why there is such a lasting memory of him being so poor in the playoffs.

Ed Giacomin, on the other hand, appears to have been below average in the playoffs more often than not.

It was controversial when I said it in the preliminary thread, and it probably still is, but I still don't see what makes Giacomin any better than Roberto Luongo.
I 100% agree with all of this.

Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
This was done for Tony Esposito earlier in the project and is referred to by TDMM above.

A quick glance at other SC Finals from the seventies shows that Tony Esposito was unequaled or matched in his futility, especially in 1973.
And what percent of his career-long playoff performance does this represent?

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
But I'm pretty sure I'll have Grant Fuhr over Smith.
You had me until this. Because although Smith was typically 1% worse than his understudies, Fuhr was 3% worse than his in Edmonton, at least by the way I calculated it.

I'm saying put Fuhr over Smith all you want, I'm still not sure how I'll have them, but the "vs. backups" numbers are not a compelling reason why, or even a reason why at all.

Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
I also value Fuhr not only playing in different situations and under different coaches, different teams, and all that. But also demonstrably different eras...80's hockey into the dead-puck era...I think that gets overlooked a tiny bit sometimes. But maybe not many value that like I do.
Good point.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote