HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Round 2, Vote 9 (HOH Top Goaltenders)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-09-2013, 12:22 PM
  #26
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Tim Thomas is the best by a fair margin, in my opinion. Lunqvist is more consistent because he has less of a high-water-mark to live up to.
Disagreed.

Fun with GARG
Lundqvist
55.6, 53.5, 52.4, 52.4, 49.2, 45.6, 33.2
2012, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2011, 2009, 2008
Average of 6 Best GARG seasons=308.7

Thomas
74.1, 66.9, 47.8, 37.3, 36.6, 29.1, 22.
2011, 2009, 2008, 2006, 2012, 2007, 2010
Average of 6 Best GARG seasons=291.8

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkey Town 18 View Post
Seems like you can pretty much use the same logic when comparing Luongo to Lundqvist, except he only has 3-4 more seasons as a solid starter.


Prediction: In 5 years we'll be ranking Lundqvist over both of them
Exactly, and that's why I had him so high on my original list. I can understand not wanting to reward his consistency over Thomas's ridiculous peak value, but the whole he's a product of his team thing is so absurd (especially if you're advocating for Thomas!).

Rob Scuderi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 12:32 PM
  #27
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,877
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring Back Scuderi View Post
Disagreed.

Fun with GARG
Lundqvist
55.6, 53.5, 52.4, 52.4, 49.2, 45.6, 33.2
2012, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2011, 2009, 2008
Average of 6 Best GARG seasons=308.7

Thomas
74.1, 66.9, 47.8, 37.3, 36.6, 29.1, 22.
2011, 2009, 2008, 2006, 2012, 2007, 2010
Average of 6 Best GARG seasons=291.8
But in the playoffs, Thomas wins by a few touchdowns.

quoipourquoi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 12:33 PM
  #28
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Well, for one, he's not particularly consistent in the playoffs relative to his contemporaries. In terms of games played at or above average vs. games played below average, he barely breaks even at 28-27 over 55 playoff games. Compare that to Thomas (33-17) and Luongo (35-26).
did you just imply Luongo was a “consistent” playoff goalie?

Luongo’s aggregate numbers are decent (not great) but he has easily the most bed-****ing games out of all the top playoff goalies post-lockout (18%). I’ve done these numbers before. Only Fleury is close (17%).

Lundqvist is down at 13%. Brodeur is at 11% in the same period (since last cup)

Quote:
As for his voting record, with the exception of his rookie season and 2011-12, is it not an example of a goaltender getting rewarded for high GP?

I've gone on record saying he'd receive my 2nd place vote in 2006 and 2012.

2006-07
Ties for third place after appearing on only 7 of 30 ballots and just 13 of 143 All-Star ballots (7th place). He's only 10th in save percentage, but he plays 70 games.

2007-08
Appears on 9 of 30 Vezina ballots and 58 of 133 All-Star ballots (4th place). He's only 18th in save percentage, but he plays 72 games.

2008-09
Appears on 8 of 30 Vezina ballots and 5 of 131 All-Star ballots (9th place). He's only 12th in save percentage, but he plays 70 games.

2009-10
Appears on 4 of 30 Vezina ballots and 2 of 131 All-Star ballots (9th place). He's only 8th in save percentage, but he plays 73 games.

2010-11
Appears on 9 of 30 Vezina ballots and 37 of 125 All-Star ballots (5th place). He's only 7th in save percentage, but he plays 68 games.


And he wasn't even a strong goaltender in his Olympic Gold run. Niittymaki had a .951. Nabokov had a .940. Aebischer had a .940. Budaj had a .924. Brodeur had a .923. Lundqvist had a .907.

So basically we are looking at two book-ending seasons 2006 (2nd to Kiprusoff) and 2012 where in-between them, less than half of either set of voters ever placed him as a top-three goaltender in a given year. How is this enough to get him on this list? How is this enough to put him above Tim Thomas and Roberto Luongo? He has a relatively poor playoff record, and his best finish in save percentage is 4th.
Your bolded is a good point worth exploring.

But take a look at the last 7 years in total. Who has the most vezina votes? Others got a few more than him from season to season but he has to be in the top-3 for total votes received from the league’s GMs since the lockout, probably behind Brodeur and either Thomas or Luongo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Tim Thomas is the best by a fair margin, in my opinion. Lunqvist is more consistent because he has less of a high-water-mark to live up to.
Both have had a pretty vanilla cast of backups since 2006, and Lundqvist’s outperformed his backups by 20 points, as opposed to “just” 12 points by Thomas. And over a sample of 100 more games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Is it Lundqvist's accomplishment that Rangers kept signing sub-AHL level backups? (Except Biron, against whom Lundqvist hardly did all that supremely well)

Also, I can't imagine how can you have him over Thomas, who achieved so much more it's not even funny.
His accomplishments are well-earned, but there are many more team-related question marks with Thomas than with Lundqvist. And if you back up and look at the big picture rather than zeroing in on “accomplishments” and pretending the off years don’t matter, Lundqvist has been the better goalie on a day-to-day level. Not by a lot, but by a noticeable amount. Case in point, if Thomas wasn’t winning the Vezina, he wasn’t even really getting considered for it. Lundqvist was getting considered every season.


Last edited by seventieslord: 01-09-2013 at 02:21 PM.
seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 12:43 PM
  #29
lamini
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco MacArthur View Post
Here are TGHP bios for each candidate (some better than others, I'll admit):

Vladimir Dzurilla
This should be league stats for Dzurilla:

ROK TÝM SOUTĚŽ GP MIN GA GAA SO SVS %
1959-60 Slovan Bratislava "B" 2.liga - - - - - - -
1960-61 Slovan Bratislava 1.liga 31 - 99 3,19 2 - -
1961-62 Slovan Bratislava 1.liga 31 - 94 3,03 1 - -
1962-63 Slovan Bratislava 1.liga 32 - 92 2,88 1 919 90,90
1963-64 Slovan Bratislava 1.liga 30 - 91 3,03 1 961 91,35
1964-65 Slovan Bratislava 1.liga 31 - 99 3,19 2 1009 91,06
1965-66 Slovan Bratislava 1.liga 36 - 115 3,19 2 1131 90,77
1966-67 Slovan Bratislava 1.liga 9 - 28 3,11 0 - -
1967-68 Slovan Bratislava 1.liga 30 - 74 2,47 2 1748 95,94
1968-69 Slovan Bratislava 1.liga 33 - 96 2,91 3 827 89,60
1969-70 Slovan Bratislava 1.liga 34 - 73 2,15 3 934 92,75
1970-71 Slovan Bratislava 1.liga 19 - 55 2,89 1 - -
1971-72 Slovan Bratislava 1.liga 31 - 72 2,32 1 - -
1972-73 Slovan Bratislava 1.liga 8 - 29 3,63 - 247 89,49
1973-74 ZKL Brno 1.liga 38 - 230 6,05 2 1066 82,25
1974-75 ZKL Brno 1.liga 40 - 242 6,05 3 1047 81,23
1975-76 ZKL Brno 1.liga 31 - 151 4,87 2 1014 87,04
1976-77 TJ Zetor Brno 1.liga 42 2467 138 3,36 0 1253 90,08
1977-78 TJ Zetor Brno 1.liga 40 2080 117 3,38 4 1010 89,62
1978-79 Augsburger EV 1.BDL 14 - - 0,00 - - -
1979-80 SC Riesserse 1.BDL 42 2500 126 3,02 - - -
1980-81 SC Riesserse 1.BDL 42 - - 0,00 - - -
1981-82 SC Riesserse 1.BDL 38 - - 0,00 - - -

I'll do my best to confirm them soon (source Kometa fan site) and find some other goalie stats from that time so we can compare them

Edit: Somehow can't find a way to fix this to be "readable"

Link: http://hckometa.wz.cz/hraci/hraci.ph...rilla-vladimir


Last edited by lamini: 01-09-2013 at 12:56 PM.
lamini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 12:45 PM
  #30
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkey Town 18 View Post
Seems like you can pretty much use the same logic when comparing Luongo to Lundqvist, except he only has 3-4 more seasons as a solid starter.


Prediction: In 5 years we'll be ranking Lundqvist over both of them
Yes, pretty much. Lundqvist plus 3-4 decent seasons = Luongo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring Back Scuderi View Post
Disagreed.

Fun with GARG
Lundqvist
55.6, 53.5, 52.4, 52.4, 49.2, 45.6, 33.2
2012, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2011, 2009, 2008
Average of 6 Best GARG seasons=308.7

Thomas
74.1, 66.9, 47.8, 37.3, 36.6, 29.1, 22.
2011, 2009, 2008, 2006, 2012, 2007, 2010
Average of 6 Best GARG seasons=291.8


Exactly, and that's why I had him so high on my original list. I can understand not wanting to reward his consistency over Thomas's ridiculous peak value, but the whole he's a product of his team thing is so absurd (especially if you're advocating for Thomas!).
Exactly like I’d have imagined. Thomas has the two best seasons, Lundqvist has the next five best.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Rather disappointing to see the original premise done away with.

Top 40 required a submission of 60 candidate names that created an aggregate pool. 50 would/should have required a submission of 75 candidate names. Effectively 15 goalies were removed from consideration if the list goes to 50.
The original premise is not done away with. It is nothing more than an idea being tossed around. If we go that route, we can certainly look at the idea of having everyone submit another 10 names in addition to their original list, or something like that.

But that really wouldn’t be necessary. How likely is it that we would miss a player in the top-50 who a bunch of voters would have placed 61st-75th on their original submission?

The goalies that would get the 41st-50th spots are all up for discussion now, plus three more. Those three more aren’t going to be guys who no one had on their radar.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
That's what I'm worried about. It would be scary to vote for the #50 goaltender if less than half of us had him on our ballot. But if there's 10 goalies after our Top 40 who have appeared on 80-95% of the ballots, sure, let's rank them.
The goalie with the 41st-most consideration on the aggregate list was on 25 of 27 ballots. The next three were on 24. One was on 23. The goalies in 47th, 48th, 49th, and 50th on the aggregate list, based on how many people ranked them, were on 22, 22, 20, and 19 lists, respectively. So it’s not like we would be likely to end up inducting anyone with only fringe support.

We would, however, be discussing guys who received only fringe support. We’d likely have ten more goalies on the ballot than we are inducting, which would take us down to a guy who was on just 13 ballots.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 01:01 PM
  #31
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
But in the playoffs, Thomas wins by a few touchdowns.
No question there, I just think it's worth stressing how close their regular season careers have been.

Rob Scuderi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 01:12 PM
  #32
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,877
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
did you just imply Luongo was a “consistent” playoff goalie?

Luongo’s aggregate numbers are decent (not great) but he has easily the most bed-****ing games out of all the top playoff goalies post-lockout (18%).
Oh, absolutely, he does. But the playoffs aren't a race to not **** the bed; they're a race to four. Luongo may give up an extra game every once in every twenty starts (and we've seen the divide; he only struggles against two specific teams), but he's still more consistently above average in spite of this.


And let's not lose sight of the fact that Luongo had six Top-10 save percentage seasons prior to his first playoff run. When people talk about his playoffs, he's getting kicked while he's down, because he's recorded 80% of those playoff games after his average GP per year dipped down below 60 after averaging 72 in his prime. We don't know what Luongo at his peak looked like as a playoff goaltender. But 2007 looked fine.


Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Both have had a pretty vanilla cast of backups since 2006, and Lundqvist’s outperformed his backups by 20 points, as opposed to “just” 12 points by Thomas. And over a sample of 100 more games.
How is Rask "vanilla"? Rask led the league in save percentage while Thomas struggled with injury. He is a very capable starter. We've gone over the distance Thomas put between himself and his backups in 2009 and 2011 in a different voting thread, so it isn't as if it is all team influence either. Boston just happens to have two strong goaltenders instead of one. Maybe that makes Lundqvist more valuable, but that doesn't make Lundqvist better.


Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
And if you back up and look at the big picture rather than zeroing in on “accomplishments” and pretending the off years don’t matter, Lundqvist has been the better goalie on a day-to-day level. Not by a lot, but by a noticeable amount. Case in point, if Thomas wasn’t winning the Vezina, he wasn’t even really getting considered for it. Lundqvist was get
Which I believe to be the result of high GP. (I'm assuming your point was about Lundqvist's reception of a handful of votes each season from 2007-2011)

quoipourquoi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 01:16 PM
  #33
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,877
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
The goalie with the 41st-most consideration on the aggregate list was on 25 of 27 ballots. The next three were on 24. One was on 23. The goalies in 47th, 48th, 49th, and 50th on the aggregate list, based on how many people ranked them, were on 22, 22, 20, and 19 lists, respectively. So it’s not like we would be likely to end up inducting anyone with only fringe support.

We would, however, be discussing guys who received only fringe support. We’d likely have ten more goalies on the ballot than we are inducting, which would take us down to a guy who was on just 13 ballots.
That sounds perfect actually. We're getting less and less uniform in our vote, so if someone can make a particularly strong argument for one of those fringe goaltenders, more power to them.

quoipourquoi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 01:30 PM
  #34
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 31,462
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
That sounds perfect actually. We're getting less and less uniform in our vote, so if someone can make a particularly strong argument for one of those fringe goaltenders, more power to them.
I think we need to be cautious about going down this road. Strong arguments for fringe goalies are great, but not every fringe goalie is going to have an active advocate. If we introduce a bunch of fringe candidates, even just in the name of discussion, we run a significant chance of making bad decisions that wouldn't have been made otherwise.

Without the aggregate list in front of me I can't be specific about what I'm saying here, but: it would be a good idea to cut the list of candidates off at a conservative place. A short list of candidates to place in order is not a bad thing when finishing the project. A long list that includes fringe candidates, one of whom might catch lightning in a bottle due to a single persuasive argument, is more likely to cause avoidable errors than to make a better list.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 01:30 PM
  #35
ContrarianGoaltender
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 569
vCash: 500
I still think there may be a bit of a misconception of exactly how much a good goalie without uniquely strong team support can be expected to accomplish in terms of awards voting in a 30 team league. This continued nitpicking of guys like Lundqvist and Luongo just doesn't make any sense to me.

It seems like there is still an expectation that even in the modern game the best goalies should simply sweep awards voting year after year, and that's frankly completely unreasonable given the talent pool and normal variance of performance. I'm guessing that Hasek and Brodeur had a lot to do with this, but they really are not comparable at all to your kind of elite guy who should be considered in this range. Hasek had the greatest peak ever, while Brodeur was one of the best goalies ever on one of the most consistently excellent defensive teams ever.

Let's look at Patrick Roy, the #1 goalie of all-time according to this panel, and what he managed to do in Colorado when he was playing on a strong overall team but not a team that was generally considered one of the few elite defensive teams in the league (in contrast to some of his earlier Montreal squads):

1995-96: Hart NR, Vezina 9th, AST T8th
1996-97: Hart 8th, Vezina 3rd, AST 3rd
1997-98: Hart NR, Vezina 5th, AST 6th
1998-99: Hart NR, Vezina T8th, AST 8th
1999-00: Hart NR, Vezina 7th, AST NR
2000-01: Hart NR, Vezina 5th, AST 4th
2001-02: Hart 3rd, Vezina 2nd, AST 1st
2002-03: Hart 12th, Vezina 4th, AST 6th

All that was done despite Roy posting a .918 save percentage throughout this period, while league average was .905. Roy also didn't outplay his backups by all that much. Over the entire period his backups combined for .909, but that is skewed because a lot of it is made up of Stephane Fiset's .898 in a partial year as a starter before "Le Trade" in the higher-scoring 1995-96 season where Roy didn't play all that hot himself (.909). From 1996-97 to 2002-03, Roy had a 2.23 GAA and .918 save percentage, compared to his backups' 2.41 and .914.

Now obviously Patrick Roy had playoff results and Conn Smythes behind him, so it's not exactly apples to apples. He also had Forsberg and Sakic in front of him, which none of these guys had either, but at the same time I'm certainly not saying that Luongo and Lundqvist measure up to Roy overall, even only Colorado-era Roy.

However, it still can easily be argued that in terms of regular season awards voting and consistency, guys like Luongo and Lundqvist do in fact measure up to Colorado-era Roy. Just compare the numbers. And yet nobody at all dismissed Roy's regular season resume in Colorado by saying he didn't do much in awards voting outside of a couple of years, or that he didn't outplay his backups by much, or that he had huge equipment, or that he only won awards when his team put up a strong defensive effort, even though all of those things are true (again, regular season only).

Seems to me we either need to give the 30-team guys more credit for their consistently strong play, or revise the #1 guy on our list. I'd probably just settle for dropping the binary, awards-dependent "either a goalie won the Vezina and was great or he didn't win it and therefore was no better than anyone else" focus which misses the vast majority of the picture when it comes to active goaltenders.


Last edited by ContrarianGoaltender: 01-09-2013 at 01:40 PM.
ContrarianGoaltender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 02:06 PM
  #36
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Al Rollins is my dark horse. I know a little about him but not enough to feel like I could comfortably rank him just yet.
I see Rollins as a lesser version of Tim Thomas - he has 3 truly dominant seasons and not much else, largely due to injuries. But when Rollins won his only Cup, Turk Broda started the majority of the games. So Thomas' 2011 playoffs is much better than anything Rollins did.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
That is some serious Lundqvist hate...not that it's the be-all, end-all, but just as a guideline...the guy has 7 NHL seasons and has this resume:

Hart: 3rd (1st goalie; 2nd most first place votes overall), 9th (2nd goalie), 14th (5th goalie), t-22nd* (one vote, 4th goalie), t-23rd* (one vote, 6th goalie)
Vezina: 1st, 3rd, 3rd, t-3rd, 4th, 6th, 6th
AS Team: 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th, t-8th, 9th
---
For the 3 years before he came to the NHL he was the best goalie in the 3rd best league in the world (which might have moved to 2nd best during the NHL lockout) - which some goalies will get credit for when stretching to cover their flaws but this is really a blip on a wholly impressive resume. So he doesn't need the help...

Oh, and he won the Gold Medal for Sweden at a best-on-best Olympics at the age of 23 or whatever it was...

So in 7 years, the league's GMs have considered him a top-6 goalie in the game all 7 years...and he was top-3 in 4 of 7 years. And he passes the eye test on top of it all...

If that guy is multiple tiers below most of this group, then I have been grossly misinformed about the guys above him...

That resume blows most of the guys out of the water...
Lundqvist is a strong candidate for my #1 spot this round with Percy LeSueur the other likely option.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Tim Thomas is the best by a fair margin, in my opinion. Lunqvist is more consistent because he has less of a high-water-mark to live up to.
Also because Lundqvist has been great all 7 years after the lockout, while Thomas only had 3 good seasons.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 02:15 PM
  #37
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Also because Lundqvist has been great all 7 years after the lockout, while Thomas only had 3 good seasons.
If Lundqvist's seasons of .912, .916 and .917 count as 'great', then Thomas has SIX 'great' seasons. If Lundqvist's poor playoff showings in half of his appearances count as 'great', then Thomas is superhuman.

This unfounded pro-Lundqvist bias and adoration is slowly getting beyond ridiculous. A goalie with minimal accomplishments and poor playoff record is being trumpeted as 'great' and elevated above far superior goalies. Insanity.

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 02:27 PM
  #38
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
If Lundqvist's seasons of .912, .916 and .917 count as 'great', then Thomas has SIX 'great' seasons. If Lundqvist's poor playoff showings in half of his appearances count as 'great', then Thomas is superhuman.

This unfounded pro-Lundqvist bias and adoration is slowly getting beyond ridiculous. A goalie with minimal accomplishments and poor playoff record is being trumpeted as 'great' and elevated above far superior goalies. Insanity.
I think Lundqvist's accomplishments are closer to Tom Barrasso or Curtis Joseph than they are to any of the available modern goalies this round.

And you aren't comparing save percentages from 60+ game seasons with 40 GP, are you?

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 02:30 PM
  #39
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,796
vCash: 500
If you guys want to discuss whether to expand the list or not, do it in this thread:

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1319463

Should have probably made the thread to begin with, but I naively thought there wouldn't be much to talk about.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 02:36 PM
  #40
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianGoaltender View Post
I'd probably just settle for dropping the binary, awards-dependent "either a goalie won the Vezina and was great or he didn't win it and therefore was no better than anyone else" focus which misses the vast majority of the picture when it comes to active goaltenders.
Exactly…

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Oh, absolutely, he does. But the playoffs aren't a race to not **** the bed; they're a race to four. Luongo may give up an extra game every once in every twenty starts (and we've seen the divide; he only struggles against two specific teams), but he's still more consistently above average in spite of this.
I agree, as I said, I have him very high, but consistent in the playoffs he is not.

Quote:
How is Rask "vanilla"? Rask led the league in save percentage while Thomas struggled with injury. He is a very capable starter. We've gone over the distance Thomas put between himself and his backups in 2009 and 2011 in a different voting thread, so it isn't as if it is all team influence either. Boston just happens to have two strong goaltenders instead of one. Maybe that makes Lundqvist more valuable, but that doesn't make Lundqvist better.
Rask was 22 when he led the NHL in sv% and did so in a fairly light schedule. Maybe he’s a “capable starter” but he’s not a “proven capable starter” aside from a flash. It’s very likely that his sv% that season didn’t even come close to actually reflecting his ability. Considering Thomas posted similar numbers himself in the seasons before and after, they kind of call eachother into question. Would any pretty good goalie post those numbers on 2009-2011 Boston?

Quote:
Which I believe to be the result of high GP. (I'm assuming your point was about Lundqvist's reception of a handful of votes each season from 2007-2011)
Yes, sorry. Post was cut off.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 02:50 PM
  #41
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,796
vCash: 500
NHL All Star Teams for pre-Vezina goalies

I'm including the unofficial GM-voted teams from the late 20s when available. 3rd Team All Stars are unofficial but based off the same pool of votes that determine 1st and 2nd Team.

Percy LeSueur pre-dated the NHL All-Star Teams, and Vladimir Dzurilla spent his career in Europe.

Alec Connell
  • 3rd Team All Star (1928) behind Worters and Hainsworth - the only year before 1931 we have records past 1st
  • 3rd Team All Star* (1935) behind Lorne Chabot and Tiny Thompson. *possibly tied with Roy Worters for 3rd

Lorne Chabot
  • 1st Team All Star (1935) over Tiny Thompson, Roy Worters/Alec Connell
4 goalies received votes for the 1927-28 GM-voted All Star team; Chabot wasn't one of them. Chabot tied for 4th in 1931 (2 votes), finished 5th in 1932 (3 votes), 5th in 1933 (3 votes).

Dave Kerr
  • 2nd Team All Star (1938) behind Tiny Thompson, over Wilf Cude
  • 3rd Team All Star (1939) behind rookie Frank Brimsek and Earl Robertson
  • 1st Team All Star (1940) ahead of Frank Brimsek and Earl Robertson
Kerr finished 4th in 1937.

Al Rollins
  • 3rd Team All Star (1951) behind Terry Sawchuk and Chuck Rayner, while playing only 40 games
  • not top 2 1952 (incomplete records)
  • not top 2 in 1953 (incomplete records), but Hart runner-up
  • 3rd Team All Star (1954) behind Harry Lumley and Terry Sawchuk. Won Hart Trophy.
Rollins was 4th in All Star voting behind Hall, Plante, and Sawchuk in 1957 - his last full year in the NHL before he was sent to the minors.

Gerry Cheevers
Never finished top 4 in NHL All-Star voting.
His best is 5th in 1969. He also finished 6th in 1970, 1977, and 1979.

In the WHA:
  • 1972-73 WHA All-Star Team (1st)
  • 1973-74 WHA All-Star Team (2nd)
  • 1974-75 WHA All-Star Team (2nd)

Rogie Vachon
  • 2nd Team All Star (1975) behind Bernie Parent, ahead of Gary Smith
  • 2nd Team All Star (1977) behind Ken Dryden, ahead of Chico Resch
Vachon finished 4th in 1974 and 1978.

Mike Liut
  • 3rd Team All Star (1980) behind Tony Esposito and Don Edwards
  • 1st Team All Star (1981) ahead of Mario Lessard and Don Edwards
  • 2nd Team All Star (1987) behind Ron Hextall, ahead of Grant Fuhr
Liut finished 4th in 1990.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 01-16-2013 at 04:38 AM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 02:55 PM
  #42
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Lundqvist is a strong candidate for my #1 spot this round with Percy LeSueur the other likely option.
What is your response to the argument seventies made saying that Vanbiesbrouck and Luongo can match Lundqvist's 7 year career but also add some "good but not great" years?

Hawkey Town 18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 03:04 PM
  #43
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkey Town 18 View Post
What is your response to the argument seventies made saying that Vanbiesbrouck and Luongo can match Lundqvist's 7 year career but also add some "good but not great" years?
I'm going to make a longer Lundqvist post later, but no goalie available this round can match Lundqvist's stretch of 8 years as being a borderline elite goalie every single year. 8 years, because I'm counting 2005. You can count good seasons spread over a career if you want, but the thing is, both Beezer and Luongo had down seasons in their careers. Lundqvist did not. That's a pretty long stretch where Lundqvist's team knows going into the season that Lundqvist will give them very good to borderline elite goaltending for the majority of the schedule - in addition to being the most "consistently good" goaltender since Martin Brodeur, Lundqvist is also a workhorse.

Honestly, when was Lundqvist ever not among the best goalies in the league for a stretch? The 2006 playoffs (his first NHL playoffs), when he was schooled by Patrik Elias. That's it. In addition to his accomplishments, he's unique among available goalies for never having an extended slump. Lundqvist might not win multiple playoff series on his own (though he was clearly the team MVP in the first two rounds of 2012), but he's pretty much guaranteed not to ever cost the team, either.

That kind of stability - being able to stick your goalie back there and never worry again - is what Brodeur brought to NJ. And to a lesser extent, I think it's what Lundqvist brings to the Rangers. And I don't think you can say that about any other candidate this round.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 03:20 PM
  #44
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,796
vCash: 500
Vladimir Dzurilla (Quick Summary)

Dzurilla wasn't in my top 8 last time, but he wasn't that far from making the cut. Thought a quick summary of his accomplishments might be nice:

International
•World Championships Best Goalie (1965)
•World Championships All Star (1965, 1969)
•Three WC Gold Medals (backup in 1972 and 1976, primary goalie in a platoon in 1977)
•Starting goalie in 1969 when Czechoslovakia upset the USSR twice (but didn't medal)
•Silver medal in the 1976 Canada Cup (starter)

Domestic
•Extraliga All Star (1969, 1970, 1977)
•CSSR Golden Stick 1st Among Goalies (1969, 1970, 1972, 1977)
•2nd in Golden Stick behind Holecek (1971, 1976, 1978)

For whatever reason, he seemed to drop off the face of the Earth from 1973-1975. Both awards only go back to 1969; Dzurilla first played for the National Team in 1960 and was the starter since at least 1964, so he undoubtedly would have won more.

My take: Dzurilla has several highs as high as Holecek, but he has fewer of them. He also has more lows - from 1973 to 1975, he lost his backup job on the National Team to Crha and finished behind several other goalies in Golden Stick Voting. Nonetheless, he rebounded, and his 1976-77 was as good as any year Holecek ever had (getting back to "the highs were as good as Holecek, he just had fewer of them).


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 01-09-2013 at 03:25 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 03:22 PM
  #45
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I'm going to make a longer Lundqvist post later, but no goalie available this round can match Lundqvist's stretch of 8 years as being a borderline elite goalie every single year. 8 years, because I'm counting 2005. You can count good seasons spread over a career if you want, but the thing is, both Beezer and Luongo had down seasons in their careers. Lundqvist did not. That's a pretty long stretch where Lundqvist's team knows going into the season that Lundqvist will give them very good to borderline elite goaltending for the majority of the schedule - in addition to being the most "consistently good" goaltender since Martin Brodeur, Lundqvist is also a workhorse.

Honestly, when was Lundqvist ever not among the best goalies in the league for a stretch? The 2006 playoffs (his first NHL playoffs), when he was schooled by Patrik Elias. That's it. In addition to his accomplishments, he's unique among available goalies for never having an extended slump. Lundqvist might not win multiple playoff series on his own (though he was clearly the team MVP in the first two rounds of 2012), but he's pretty much guaranteed not to ever cost the team, either.

That kind of stability - being able to stick your goalie back there and never worry again - is what Brodeur brought to NJ. And to a lesser extent, I think it's what Lundqvist brings to the Rangers. And I don't think you can say that about any other candidate this round.
Fair points...I'm going to have to see what other arguments get made. I think you have me on the fence between him and Luongo now, but it's gonna be tough for Lundqvist to overtake Beezer...Too long of a career, and 2 playoff runs better than anything either of the other two have done.

As I said before, I fully expect Lundqvist to surpass both in the near future

Hawkey Town 18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 03:25 PM
  #46
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkey Town 18 View Post
Fair points...I'm going to have to see what other arguments get made. I think you have me on the fence between him and Luongo now, but it's gonna be tough for Lundqvist to overtake Beezer...Too long of a career, and 2 playoff runs better than anything either of the other two have done.

As I said before, I fully expect Lundqvist to surpass both in the near future
I also think Beezer shouldn't fall that far behind Cujo. Beezer will probably be 3rd on my ballot this time after LeSueur and Lundqvist. I say "probably" because it's always possible someone will make a really good case for someone else, but right now, I'm much more open to moving things around after the top 3. (If I go by my ballot last time, I'd have Luongo in 4th and Connell in 5th, but that's far from set in stone).

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 03:25 PM
  #47
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I think Lundqvist's accomplishments are closer to Tom Barrasso or Curtis Joseph than they are to any of the available modern goalies this round.
Are you serious? Barrasso has twice the awards, significantly better save% placements, two Cups and actually a good playoff portfolio, unlike Lundqvist.

Joseph lacks the Vezina, but once again beats Lundqvist in save% and in playoff performances and absolutely demolishes him in longetivity.

Lundqvist is in the Ryan Miller category - same awards recognition. Similar save% placements. Miller even has him beat as far as playoff performances go. And neither of them is a top-60 goalie.

Later you talk about stability, but what does it matter when his career has been so short so far? Stability is impressive when it stretches across a long career, sure. But 7 years of 'good to very good' don't make a goalie top-60. It's especially hilarious considering you're a Holy Peak type of guy most of the time.

Quote:
And you aren't comparing save percentages from 60+ game seasons with 40 GP, are you?
Yes, yes I am. Because after certain point, the sample size is just enough. Thomas' save% wouldn't plummet just because he'd play the Islanders five more times.

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 03:34 PM
  #48
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Are you serious? Barrasso has twice the awards, significantly better save% placements, two Cups and actually a good playoff portfolio, unlike Lundqvist.

Joseph lacks the Vezina, but once again beats Lundqvist in save% and in playoff performances and absolutely demolishes him in longetivity.

Lundqvist is in the Ryan Miller category - same awards recognition. Similar save% placements. Miller even has him beat as far as playoff performances go. And neither of them is a top-60 goalie.

Later you talk about stability, but what does it matter when his career has been so short so far? Stability is impressive when it stretches across a long career, sure. But 7 years of 'good to very good' don't make a goalie top-60. It's especially hilarious considering you're a Holy Peak type of guy most of the time.


Yes, yes I am. Because after certain point, the sample size is just enough. Thomas' save% wouldn't plummet just because he'd play the Islanders five more times.
How are these the same?

Lundqvist Vezina record: 1st, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 6th
Lundqvist All Star record: 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th, 9th, 9th

Miller Vezina: 1st, 7th
Miller AS: 1st , 6th, 8th, 8th

Hawkey Town 18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 03:36 PM
  #49
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Later you talk about stability, but what does it matter when his career has been so short so far? Stability is impressive when it stretches across a long career, sure. But 7 years of 'good to very good' don't make a goalie top-60. It's especially hilarious considering you're a Holy Peak type of guy most of the time.
7 years straight of being considered a top 6 goalie in a 30 team league by NHL GMs is a pretty damn good peak if you ask me, especially considering that for 4 of those 7 years he was a finalist (top 3) for the Vezina. You argued in favor of Ed Giacomin last round based on the opinions of sports writers in the late 60s/early 70s. Is your position that the opinions of sports writers from back then matter, but the opinions of modern GMs do not?

8 years (you have to include his MVP award over NHL stars in 2005 in the SEL) is longer than the careers of Dryden, Durnan, and Gardiner. It's about as long as Jiri Holecek, Billy Smith, and Grant Fuhr were relevant goalies. It's longer than Terry Sawchuk's peak, though Sawchuk had some great years sprinkled in afterwards.

Ed Giacomin was inducted last round on the base of 5-6, at most 7 relevant seasons. Lundqvist already has a little more than that.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2013, 03:44 PM
  #50
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,877
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianGoaltender View Post
at the same time I'm certainly not saying that Luongo and Lundqvist measure up to Roy overall, even only Colorado-era Roy.

However, it still can easily be argued that in terms of regular season awards voting and consistency, guys like Luongo and Lundqvist do in fact measure up to Colorado-era Roy.
Lundqvist
4, 4, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18
Roy
2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 10, 13

In terms of save percentage, Colorado Roy has a clear edge over Lundqvist in terms of consistency and quality, meaning that Lundqvist's award-voting edge probably has less to do with stopping the puck and more to do with playing a high number of games each season and collecting Wins and Shutouts.

But the issue here is that this is the BEST aspect of Lundqvist's career. He does not have a good playoff career. He did not play well en route to his Olympic Gold Medal. This is all that he has: A stretch of seven regular seasons that are slightly worse than the lesser half of a better goalie's regular season career. With no regard to his playoffs. With no regard to his Olympic tournament.

Colorado Roy contended for Hart votes with his centers, and he contended for Vezina votes with the peak of our #2 goaltender and the shadow of his former self in a voting system in which only three goaltenders get named. A voting system that favors goaltenders who record high GP based statistics.

Think of the argument we're having about composing a list of 50 goaltenders from an aggregate list of 60 goaltenders each. The Vezina vote is naming three goaltenders from an aggregate list of three each. It is a flawed system. Lundqvist's relative placement in the AS race compared to the Vezina race shows that not everyone believes that his seasons were as strong as the Vezina race placed them.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianGoaltender View Post
And yet nobody at all dismissed Roy's regular season resume in Colorado by saying he didn't do much in awards voting outside of a couple of years, or that he didn't outplay his backups by much, or that he had huge equipment, or that he only won awards when his team put up a strong defensive effort, even though all of those things are true (again, regular season only).
Because these things are the ONLY argument for Lundqvist. He is in this discussion because of his Vezina consideration.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianGoaltender View Post
Seems to me we either need to give the 30-team guys more credit for their consistently strong play, or revise the #1 guy on our list.
For the record, since your post is certainly more about Patrick Roy than Henrik Lundqvist or Roberto Luongo, Patrick Roy's Colorado career was discussed. It was stated that he was a high-prime goaltender with an extra HOF career stapled to the back-end of his career. And no one offered an argument to the contrary.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianGoaltender View Post
I'd probably just settle for dropping the binary, awards-dependent "either a goalie won the Vezina and was great or he didn't win it and therefore was no better than anyone else" focus which misses the vast majority of the picture when it comes to active goaltenders.
Who is saying this? The argument against Lundqvist isn't that a non-Vezina season cannot be of quality, but that his small number of third-place votes based upon GP-statistics is the reason for a deceptively strong Vezina share.

quoipourquoi is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:40 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.