View Single Post
Old
12-31-2012, 05:09 PM
  #73
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 22,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianGoaltender View Post
I agree that those years work out very well for Luongo, that's how it always works for some guys when you look at periods of a decade or whatever. Switch the years to 2003 to 2012 and I think Luongo still probably ends up at #2 though. He definitely still does if you are mainly going based on some kind of cumulative performance stat like GVT or goals saved above league average. And if you think Lundqvist or Thomas deserves that spot, then they should also be candidates now, as it can still be argued that ranking 4th against the 2003-2012 goalie crop remains more impressive than wherever Giacomin ranked against his peer group throughout his career.
I'm curious about where you'd rank Kipper. Luongo vs. Kipper (for 03-12) is certainly debatable.

Quote:
It should also be noted that actual awards voting worked out pretty terribly for Luongo, considering he twice finished as 2AST to Martin Brodeur (including 2007 which many would argue was Brodeur's best season). Luongo also lost a prime season to the 2004-05 lockout. Giacomin, on the other hand, mainly took advantage of the brief window of opportunity between the aging original six goalie cohort and the emergence of Esposito, Dryden, Parent and Vachon, as well the fact that he was on an original six team in the brief period of time when the original six completely dominated against the new expansion teams. He also played a lot of games while many other teams were going with platoons, which certainly helped him out in terms of awards.
Humm... Well, games played should be factored in positively for Giacomin. Playing non-platoon is a platoon era should be considered a plus. The flipside is -- if Giacomin earned his AST'S FOR THE SOLE REASON that he played a bit more, well, they kinda "lose" some value (that's obvious...) -- but I don't see how it could be viewed differently than, say, Frank Nighbor continuing to be a 60-minute player when nobody was doing so. Also, the "comparative" part of me says that if Giacomin doesn't get in, then a guy like Roger Crozier has no business whatsoever to do in the Top-60.

Again, full disclosure -- i think it's about time for Giacomin.


Quote:
Florida of the 2000s was worse than the 1970s Kings, but sure, Vachon did play in some weak team situations, and overall team effects were generally larger in the '70s which means it is quite possible that Vachon had a harder time of it than Luongo. To rate him above Luongo one would certainly have to make that argument, given that Luongo has much better adjusted save stats (Vachon had a career .896 save percentage compared to .894 league average, Luongo is at .919 vs. .908).
At that point, Luongo played A LOT with the Canucks and I factored that when I said that Luongo had better teammates (as a whole) than Vachon). Not to mention -- being bad in the 2000 was not quite being bad in the 1960-1970.



Quote:
I guess that depends on your definition of accomplishments.

Career save percentage vs. league average:

Ed Giacomin: .902 career, .902 league average
Henrik Lundqvist: .920 career, .909 league average
Thanks for that info. It's highly unlikely that Lundqvist doesn't end up in my Top-8 as soon as he appears for voting, unless the "results" for this round are, let's say, "unsatisfying".

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote