Sounds extremely familiar to two other all-time greats who played defence that have been compared around these parts. You were on the other side of the fence for that one.
You can't have a great series if you tanked two games.
Colorado vs Detroit, 1996. Colorado vs Chicago of the same year? How about Colorado vs Detroit in '02? I don't think anyone was complaining about Roy in any of those, and yet those stats lines aren't dissimilar to those you refer to in your reply.
Sounds extremely familiar to two other all-time greats who played defence that have been compared around these parts. You were on the other side of the fence for that one.
Carry on..
Yeah because this is anything like comparing a guy with a 22 year career with a guy that had a 20 year career.
Besides, as I have said at great ****ing length throughout all 3 threads...I am not arguing against Hasek being the greatest ever. I am simply saying that Roy is the playoff king and that NO ONE comes close to him in that regard.
Yeah because this is anything like comparing a guy with a 22 year career with a guy that had a 20 year career.
Besides, as I have said at great ****ing length throughout all 3 threads...I am not arguing against Hasek being the greatest ever. I am simply saying that Roy is the playoff king and that NO ONE comes close to him in that regard.
22 year NHL career vs. 20 year NHL career excluding a season lost to the lockout and 2 seasons of pro hockey in Sweden.
Roy played 19 NHL seasons and Hasek played what...30 years of professional hockey when you combine his play in the NHL and Europe?
All of these players had great longevity so I don't know what that has to do with anything.
When it comes to Roy/Hasek you bring up the playoffs but that was never such a big deal with you in the other comparison. If Roy was a "playoff king" when compared to Hasek then Lidstrom was a "playoff king" when compared to Bourque. I don't know of another player who had their +/- drop as much as Bourque when comparing regular season play and the playoffs. It's far more than Hasek's save %.
I don't mean to derail this thread but I see a huge inconsistency in how you have argued these two debates.
You can't have a great series if you tanked two games.
Hasek against New Jersey had two bad games, and that was a great series.
The point I made a few days ago is that Roy vs. Hasek in 2002 isn't that big of a deal, because the Avalanche were playing on borrowed time, and Roy had the more consistent series than Hasek.
First of all, this is the Avalanche that year:
2. Colorado, 99
3. San Jose, 99
4. St. Louis, 98
5. Chicago, 96
6. Phoenix, 95
7. Los Angeles, 95
8. Vancouver, 94
9. Edmonton, 92
10. Dallas, 90
The only reason they made the playoffs (let alone won the division) is because they had the 1st Team All-Star goaltender - and unlike the 1999 Sabres, their offense had dropped in the playoffs on top of that (2.57 to 2.54).
On a stronger offensive team, Roy had played well enough in that series relative to Hasek to have won it before he even gets to his apocalyptically bad 21st game in three rounds (can we say the same about Hasek/Belfour or Hasek/Kolzig?). And it's not like that game is hidden in his statistics; it took his 2002 playoff numbers from a .917 to a .909. It's there for everyone to see, and it only gets misused because it seems to be the only game people have watched from him in that playoff - because they certainly don't respond to my posts about his other two Game 7s from that same year.
22 year NHL career vs. 20 year NHL career excluding a season lost to the lockout and 2 seasons of pro hockey in Sweden.
Roy played 19 NHL seasons and Hasek played what...30 years of professional hockey when you combine his play in the NHL and Europe?
All of these players had great longevity so I don't know what that has to do with anything.
When it comes to Roy/Hasek you bring up the playoffs but that was never such a big deal with you in the other comparison. If Roy was a "playoff king" when compared to Hasek then Lidstrom was a "playoff king" when compared to Bourque. I don't know of another player who had their +/- drop as much as Bourque when comparing regular season play and the playoffs. It's far more than Hasek's save %.
I don't mean to derail this thread but I see a huge inconsistency in how you have argued these two debates.
There is no inconsistency.
Lidstrom gets full credit for his post season success over Bourque. It's the only thing that makes up for Bourque's higher and much longer regular season peak but Lidstrom's post season success is NOT on the same level as Roy's.
And Hasek's disadvantages over the years are not as bad as Bourque's, nor are Roy's advantages as great as Lidstrom's.
The difference, FOR THE LAST TIME, it that Lidstrom's playoff performances and results are no where remotely close to to being ahead of Bourque's by the degree Roy is ahead of everyone else.
If Lidstrom's playoffs held the same weight as Roy's, you would have a point and an argument. I would also have a different opinion on Bourque vs Lidstrom.
But it doesn't and you don't so I don't.
Last edited by Rhiessan71: 10-18-2012 at 02:08 PM.
22 year NHL career vs. 20 year NHL career excluding a season lost to the lockout and 2 seasons of pro hockey in Sweden.
Roy played 19 NHL seasons and Hasek played what...30 years of professional hockey when you combine his play in the NHL and Europe?
All of these players had great longevity so I don't know what that has to do with anything.
When it comes to Roy/Hasek you bring up the playoffs but that was never such a big deal with you in the other comparison. If Roy was a "playoff king" when compared to Hasek then Lidstrom was a "playoff king" when compared to Bourque. I don't know of another player who had their +/- drop as much as Bourque when comparing regular season play and the playoffs. It's far more than Hasek's save %.
I don't mean to derail this thread but I see a huge inconsistency in how you have argued these two debates.
as rhiessan has stated something like eight times in this and other threads in the last few days, roy is not just a playoff king compared to hasek. he is a playoff king compared to everyone. let that sink in: everyone.
now, if lidstrom were far and away the greatest playoff defenseman of all time and won three conn smythes with his four cups, then you can make that analogy and call him out for being inconsistent. because that is not the case, you don't have to agree with it, but you have to respect that some people believe the staggering playoff numbers and awards roy put up trump anything any other goalie ever did. what roy did was literally incomparable. no one came close.
Hasek against New Jersey had two bad games, and that was a great series.
The point I made a few days ago is that Roy vs. Hasek in 2002 isn't that big of a deal, because the Avalanche were playing on borrowed time, and Roy had the more consistent series than Hasek.
First of all, this is the Avalanche that year:
2. Colorado, 99
3. San Jose, 99
4. St. Louis, 98
5. Chicago, 96
6. Phoenix, 95
7. Los Angeles, 95
8. Vancouver, 94
9. Edmonton, 92
10. Dallas, 90
The only reason they made the playoffs (let alone won the division) is because they had the 1st Team All-Star goaltender - and unlike the 1999 Sabres, their offense had dropped in the playoffs on top of that (2.57 to 2.54).
On a stronger offensive team, Roy had played well enough in that series relative to Hasek to have won it before he even gets to his apocalyptically bad 21st game in three rounds (can we say the same about Hasek/Belfour or Hasek/Kolzig?). And it's not like that game is hidden in his statistics; it took his 2002 playoff numbers from a .917 to a .909. It's there for everyone to see, and it only gets misused because it seems to be the only game people have watched from him in that playoff - because they certainly don't respond to my posts about his other two Game 7s from that same year.
Two things, what two games pray tell, did Hasek play badly in that 1994 series? I count 1 bad game. And he may have had the best playoff game ever in that series.
Secondly, the 1999 offensive numbers of the Sabres are skewed simply because they played a crappy defensive team of Toronto, a team they scored, 5, 3, 4, 5, and 4 goals respectively. The other series goal totals were 2, 3, 3, 4, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 1, 2, 0, and 1 goal. Hardly earth shattering offense.
Thirdly, everyone is ignoring the fact that Hasek had the burden of having to outplay the opponent's goaltender in almost series in order for the team to win. No one should ever say that Broduer outplayed Hasek in 1994, that Kolzig outdueled him in 1998, that Belfour did the same in 1999, rather their teams outplayed his team and that was difference. He did his part.
Two things, what two games pray tell, did Hasek play badly in that 1994 series? I count 1 bad game. And he may have had the best playoff game ever in that series.
Secondly, the 1999 offensive numbers of the Sabres are skewed simply because they played a crappy defensive team of Toronto, a team they scored, 5, 3, 4, 5, and 4 goals respectively. The other series goal totals were 2, 3, 3, 4, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 1, 2, 0, and 1 goal. Hardly earth shattering offense.
Thirdly, everyone is ignoring the fact that Hasek had the burden of having to outplay the opponent's goaltender in almost series in order for the team to win. No one should ever say that Broduer outplayed Hasek in 1994, that Kolzig outdueled him in 1998, that Belfour did the same in 1999, rather their teams outplayed his team and that was difference. He did his part.
I thought Kolzig outplayed Hasek in 1998, especially in overtime. Hasek played great, but Kolzig was even better.
Good point about the offensive numbers being skewed against Toronto, but I'm sure you can find examples of that in lots of playoff runs. NJ scored over 4 goals per game in the first round against Montreal in 1997, but then scored exactly 1 goal per game against the Rangers in the second round.
Good point about the offensive numbers being skewed against Toronto, but I'm sure you can find examples of that in lots of playoff runs. NJ scored over 4 goals per game in the first round against Montreal in 1997, but then scored exactly 1 goal per game against the Rangers in the second round.
Only in this case, the distribution prior to Toronto was pretty much three goals across the board. Any team with 13 three-or-more-goal games and just 2 two-goal games is probably advancing in the DPE without a complete defensive meltdown.
