This is a debate I have had with many of my Rangers friends, and I have to say Richter hands down. He stole so many games for us when the defense was horrible. If he had this defense core in front of him He would have won so many more games, and don't bring up the cup year, I mean shortly after that when the defense was horrible other then Leetch.
Lundqvist will put up bigger numbers but I think Richter was better. Just remember the World Cup when Ricther beat team Canada 2x in Montreal he stood on his head and won the MVP. He was something else.
Richter had some of the better defenses in Ranger's history from 92-97, which are the only Richter years worth talking about, to be honest.
You want to be "horrible," check out Hank's defenses' the first couple of years, 1st pairing of Rozsival and Malik.
Richter had some of the better defenses in Ranger's history from 92-97, which are the only Richter years worth talking about, to be honest.
You want to be "horrible," check out Hank's defenses' the first couple of years, 1st pairing of Rozsival and Malik.
This. His first few years I wouldnt consider the Rangers defense good. He made the defense good. If it werent for him they wouldnt have been anywhere near as good as they were.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnowblindNYR
I didn't watch the Rangers during Richter's prime. Was there a time where he was widely considered the best goalie in the league, like Lundqvist now?
I dont think he was ever considered the best goalie back than. You had Hasak, Roy, Belfour, Brodeur, Cujo. Pretty sure he was never a finalist for the Vezina.
Love Richter and all he did for the Rangers but I think Lundqvist is better.
Alright, sorry but I have to ***** about this a bit....
A trash can could have been in net in the first 2 rounds of '94. I hope we agree on that.
Two moments stick out for me after that for Richter. Game 6 against the Devils - that game could've been far worse, but he kept it at 2-0. And game 4 against the Canucks, specifically the Bure penalty shot. And even in that series, he was largely outplayed by MacLean, especially in game 1.
So Im curious to see what your definition of "inhuman" is. In my opinion, what Lundqvist has done with largely **** teams in front of him over the years is a true goalie accomplishment.
Watch Game 2 of the Isles series.
Please.
Richter would have won the Conn Smythe had it not been for Leetch. Ahead of messier and Maclean.
This. His first few years I wouldnt consider the Rangers defense good. He made the defense good. If it werent for him they wouldnt have been anywhere near as good as they were.
I dont think he was ever considered the best goalie back than. You had Hasak, Roy, Belfour, Brodeur, Cujo. Pretty sure he was never a finalist for the Vezina.
Love Richter and all he did for the Rangers but I think Lundqvist is better.
Where as the '94 Playoffs were Richter's shining moment and he played exceptional, I just don't think his career was as stellar as Hank's has been thus far...
When Richter was on, he was the best in the league. I don't care what anybody else says.
Overall, you have to go with Richter right now. He has the cup. He was amazing during the World Cup for team USA, he won them that Cup.
I love both players tons and I think Lundqvist is top 5 in the league right now but I never considered him #1 yet. Richter had that #1 for a season or 2.
55%-45% in my mind right now.
I'm not arguing Richter's epicness here, but please don't bring in performances in the national team as PRO Richter category.. Hank single-handedly saved Team Sweden in the Olympics 2006 final e.g.
You sure? He was splitting goaltending duties with Beezer back than and his stats werent even close to top 10 in the NHL
Quote:
Smith said that he was closely monitoring the Richter negotiations. He remained convinced that the Rangers' Vezina Trophy finalist, who averaged 3.12 goals against last season and will turn 25 years old this month, would eventually rejoin the team.
Goaltending then and now are nearly incomparable. The goaltenders now have save percentages and GAA that pre lockout goalies couldn't imagine. With the change in pads, the advent of butterfly goaltending, and the rise in talent, it's unfair to compare pre-2000 goaltenders to what we have now.
At the moment, the best performance over the course of a season in history belongs to Thomas. Hank can challenge for that, if he isn't right now.
Bbrodeur on any average team would have always been average..He has a great squad in front of him for years..the trap system played religiously for many many years...and faced a miniscule amount of shots a game! His #'s apparently say other wise,still,think any where else he wouldnt be who he is today.
and I love Richter,but I had to choose Henke.The guy is just phenomenal.best goalie in the NHL and the WORLD.In my eyes i cant think of one flaw.Ive never felt so confident with any ranger goalie in net the way I do with Henrik.
Bbrodeur on any average team would have always been average..He has a great squad in front of him for years..the trap system played religiously for many many years...and faced a miniscule amount of shots a game! His #'s apparently say other wise,still,think any where else he wouldnt be who he is today.
and I love Richter,but I had to choose Henke.The guy is just phenomenal.best goalie in the NHL and the WORLD.In my eyes i cant think of one flaw.Ive never felt so confident with any ranger goalie in net the way I do with Henrik.
Like the old Dryden-Eddie Giacomin debate, Dryden faced 15 shots a game, while Eddie faced 35 tough shots a game...
