View Single Post
05-16-2013, 04:29 PM
Registered User
mrhockey193195's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 4,998
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
So a goalie who topped out at 4th in save% in the regular season has a better regular season record than a guy who led the league twice and was top-3 four times? Wow.
Not sure where you are getting those numbers from, but from hockey-reference I am seeing this for SV% finishes

Joseph: 1, 2, 6, 6, 7
Luongo: 3, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 9, 10
Lundqvist: 4, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10

I'm not sure if hockey-reference has eliminated goalies who played an insufficient number of games, so I'm taking those number with a grain of salt until I look further into them. But yes, Joseph and Luongo have slightly better SV% records than Hank. A couple points:

1) I don't think the difference is all that much, especially when you consider that from year to year, we see random goalies who have career years or maybe only play half the season and put up great numbers (i.e. Smith, maybe Bobrovsky, Elliot, etc.). For example, in 2006 Henrik finished 4th in SV%...two of the guys above him were Hasek and Huet, neither of whom played more then 43 games (granted, Henrik only played 50 that year...his rookie season). The only goalie above him who played more than 43 games was Kiprusoff, who had a .923 SV% instead of Hank's .922. Last season, the only goalie who had a higher SV% than Hank and played more than 40 games was Mike Smith, who was at .930 (Hank was at .930 as well, so they were within a few hundredths of a percentage point).

2) SV% is not the only factor in determining which goalie has been more successful. I could just as easily say that Hank is the only one of the three with a Vezina, or that Joseph is the only one without a gold medal in a major international tournament. Or better yet, I could say that in his first eight seasons, Henrik already has six top-10 SV% finishes...more than Joseph had in his whole career. Let's take everything into account when making these judgements, instead of just a couple factors.

3) I never said that Hank was necessarily better, but I did say that if he kept up his current pace for the next few years, he would be as good if not better.

Originally Posted by MrHockey193195
Lundqvist already has a comparable, if not better regular season resume than both Luongo and Cujo (assuming that Henrik keeps up his current pace for another few years)
That's really poorly worded on my part. Henrik has accomplished as much, if not more, through 8 years of his career as Luongo and Joseph did through the first 8 years of their careers (Josephs' back-to-back years of placing 2nd and 1st in SV% sure are impressive, though). And extrapolate to a few more seasons, and Henrik will have accomplished just as much as Joseph in the regular season (again, if you want to hang on Joseph leading the league in SV% once, great, but Henrik already has one Vezina that Joseph never got, and potentially will have more in the future).

I'm just rambling at this point, but the take home message I'm trying to get across is that these guys have very comparable careers in the regular season. Joseph and Luongo (so far) do not have cups. To say that Henrik absolutely needs a cup to surpass either of them is a bit much, in my opinion.

Again, this is the quote I was responding to:

Originally Posted by gmm View Post
I like Lundqvist a lot, but for me to vault him over non-HHoF guys such as Cujo and Luongo he would need a SC.

Last edited by mrhockey193195: 05-16-2013 at 04:43 PM.
mrhockey193195 is offline   Reply With Quote