HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Montoya Or Lundqvist

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-06-2006, 10:24 PM
  #51
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
Belfour was coming off an exceptionally amazing season and was at his Vezina winning peak. But a few years later you could argue Hasek was the better goalie (or you could argue that you'd still take Belfour and not be wrong).
Taking Belfour over Hasek would be indisputably wrong.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2006, 01:11 AM
  #52
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
I happen to agree with you, in 2006. (Though I do believe you can make a decent case for Belfour).

But try saying that in 1991 or 1992.

You'd hear eerily similar remarks to what we see today, success and amazing seasons be damned.

Funny how time works....

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2006, 06:53 AM
  #53
hdw
Registered User
 
hdw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Stockholm
Country: Sweden
Posts: 6,498
vCash: 500
One elite year?

Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
He had one elite year. That is not the same as being on an elite level already. And if Montoya can be on the same level, what is the damage to find out? If he is on the same level, then the older, more expensive goalie can be traded.
One "elite" year? Erh, SEL isn't NHL but it sure isn't college hockey.

And his lists during his 'non elite' play isn't that bad:
  • Named Swedish Junior Hockey Player of the Year in 2002.
  • Awarded Honkens trofé (Goalie of the Year) in 2003, 2004 and 2005.
  • Awarded Guldpucken (Player of the Year) in 2005.
  • Awarded Guldhjälmen (Most Valuable Player) in 2005.
  • Elitserien champion with Frölunda HC in 2003 and 2005.
  • Silver medal the 2003 and 2004 World Championships.
  • Named Best Goalie at the 2004 World Championships.
  • Named to the All-Star Team at the 2004 World Championship.

Note Goalie of the year, Player of the year and MVP in 2005, when SEL was loaded with lock out NHLers.

I'd still say that it would be stupid to trade any of them but stating 'one elite year' is equally silly.
// hdw

hdw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2006, 07:45 AM
  #54
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hdw View Post
One "elite" year? Erh, SEL isn't NHL but it sure isn't college hockey.

I'd still say that it would be stupid to trade any of them but stating 'one elite year' is equally silly.
Sorry, it is not silly to me. Elite years anywhere but at the NHL level are to be taken with a grain of salt, IMO. Sure they can be used as indicators, but that is it.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2006, 10:51 AM
  #55
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
I happen to agree with you, in 2006. (Though I do believe you can make a decent case for Belfour).

But try saying that in 1991 or 1992.

You'd hear eerily similar remarks to what we see today, success and amazing seasons be damned.

Funny how time works....
They will only be eerily similar if Lundqvist=Belfour and Montoya=Hasek which is extremely unlikely.

Time will tell us eventually.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2006, 10:56 AM
  #56
xander
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Section A Lynah Rink
Posts: 4,081
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
From what I have seen, Montoya is the lesser goaltender.
of course he is. What you'se seen is a 24 year old coming off several seasons in the SEL and a 20/21 year old playing his first year of proffesional hockey (in which he aquitted himself quite nicely.) It would be pretty suprising if the 24 year old wasn't better. But that doesn't really tell us what will happen in the future. Right now Montoya is just as good, maybe better, as Lundqvist was at the same age. Does that meen he will turn out to be the better goalie? Of course not, we won't know that for years, but disregarding him because a 3 years older Lundqvist is better now is pretty silly.


P.S. Edge: I find your avatar deeply disturbing.

xander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2006, 10:57 AM
  #57
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
Sorry, it is not silly to me. Elite years anywhere but at the NHL level are to be taken with a grain of salt, IMO. Sure they can be used as indicators, but that is it.
But you have repeatedly cited Montoya's elite performance at the AHL level and in juniors as evidence of great things to come.

Certainly you would agree that what Lundqvist has accomplished outside of the NHL is far more impressive than what Montoya has accomplished so far.

You can argue that Montoya is younger and might become a standout NHL goalie but Lundqvist is already that. That is an enormous difference.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2006, 01:01 PM
  #58
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
They will only be eerily similar if Lundqvist=Belfour and Montoya=Hasek which is extremely unlikely.

Time will tell us eventually.
Again not as unlikely as one might think, even if the players involved don't quite hit Hasek like status.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2006, 01:02 PM
  #59
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xander View Post

P.S. Edge: I find your avatar deeply disturbing.
Mission accomplished

I just figured I'd take my old avatar and add a Rangers feel to it.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2006, 01:12 PM
  #60
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
But you have repeatedly cited Montoya's elite performance at the AHL level and in juniors as evidence of great things to come.

Certainly you would agree that what Lundqvist has accomplished outside of the NHL is far more impressive than what Montoya has accomplished so far.

You can argue that Montoya is younger and might become a standout NHL goalie but Lundqvist is already that. That is an enormous difference.
I don't think you're really listening to what TB is saying because you seem more interested in twisting it.

TB has not predicited great things to come, but rather what he has accomplished has made it worth the risk to actually see what he does become.

No one has guranteed greatness for Montoya, in fact everyone with the opposing view from you has stressed the same thing repeatedly.

1. Montoya has shown promise.

2. Montoya's accomplishments thus far, should be worth taking time to see where it leads.

3. Montoya is very close to Lundqvist at the same age.

I think what Lundqvist has accomplished outside of the NHL is more impressive, but it should also be pointed out that he's had 3 more years to accomplish it.

That's simply not a fair comparison. A more approriate comparison would be what Lundqvist accomplished by the age of 21 compared to what Montoya has accomplished by the age of 21.

In that respect, it's far more honest and accurate.

The Olympic experience, the international stardom came AFTER the age of 20/21.

But we also have to be a bit careful with that. Most young north american goalies, don't get a chance to play in the World Championships or even the Olympics.

When we look at how Lundqvist was facing in competition for those goalie roster spots on the international level, it's a little different than who Montoya is going to be facing from America for the same slots. Taking nothing away from Lundqvist, but that is a truth. How many TOP NHL Swedish goalies can we name from the last 20 years? How many from the U.S. can we name?

But at the end of the day the point really isn't even that anyone thinks Montoya currently is better, but that it's not impossible as we've seen in hockey history. It is unlikely, but not "never going to happen" type unlikely.

At the end of the day there is still simply no good reason to make a decision now and no amazing payoff to be had for coming to that decision.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2006, 01:51 PM
  #61
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
I don't think you're really listening to what TB is saying because you seem more interested in twisting it.
I'm reading what he writes and in my opinion not twisting it in the least.

In your zeal to advocate not trading Montoya now I think it is you that fails to see that he is quite clearly consistently placing Montoya on a pedestal and downplaying what Lundqvist has accomplished. He couldn't be more explicit in this regard.

All of Lundqvist's accomplishments are treated with a sort of "Yes, but....." logic. With Montoya, in his opinion, the sky is the limit. He never expresses that with Lundqvist despite the fact that it would be next to impossible to have a more accomplished resume than Lundqvist has already assembled.

To read him you'd think Montoya is quite possibly the next Hasek. He also downplays the accomplishments of Lundqvist in the NHL by saying it was only for a very short while. Then he pooh poohs Lundqvist's international accomplishments and extols the greatness of Montoya in the AHL, a league vastly inferior to international competition.

To me there is a tremendous disparity in how he judges them with the central argument being Montoya is younger. That's wonderful that he is younger but so are a thousand other players out there. This need to put Montoya at the same level, and in his case, sometimes at a higher level is confounding to me. Like I've said earlier I think it's part of the syndrome of hoping to see the next "coming" while not appreciating in the least that you have already struck gold.

It's obvious to everyone now that I disagree with you and TB on this stuff so instead of taking verbal swings at me i.e. saying that I'm twisting his words, why not step back and admit that this all stems from our differences on if Montoya should be considered a current trade option.

Put that argument aside and tell me that the two of you don't consistently speak of the vast potential of Montoya and really never take the same stance with Lundqvist.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2006, 02:28 PM
  #62
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
I'm reading what he writes and in my opinion not twisting it in the least.
Honestly, I do not believe you are. Simply because I've seen it in my own discussions with you and I've seen you do it multiple times. I find TB having similar arguments with you that I have, in which his opinion is stated multiple times and twisted to the point where you're essentially arguing him on a point he is not making.

Quote:
In your zeal to advocate not trading Montoya now I think it is you that fails to see that he is quite clearly consistently placing Montoya on a pedestal and downplaying what Lundqvist has accomplished. He couldn't be more explicit in this regard.
There is nothing that is downplaying Lundqvist, the reason the conversation goes back to Montoya is simply because he is the one who is being looked at to be traded.

Quote:
All of Lundqvist's accomplishments are treated with a sort of "Yes, but....." logic. With Montoya, in his opinion, the sky is the limit. He never expresses that with Lundqvist despite the fact that it would be next to impossible to have a more accomplished resume than Lundqvist has already assembled.
The problem is you keep comparing a 24 year old Lundqvist to a 21 year old Montoya. What has been repeatedly mentioned is where they both were at 20/21. So the question becomes, if Montoya at the same age is right where Lundqvist has (maybe even a little ahead) how is it so impossible that he won't become as good or even little better? That's where the problem comes in.

The other problem is that examples have been provided or similar goalie situations in which the latter goalie did turn out to be better, despite some VERY impressive accomplishments early in the career.

Unfortunatly, just like the history of trades involving 20/21 year old goalies, you seem unwilling to acknowledge that as a point. If we can't acknowledge what has already been seen, than the debate starts to fall apart. Once again I see that happening, and this wasn't even a discussion that I was engaged in with you.


Quote:
To read him you'd think Montoya is quite possibly the next Hasek. He also downplays the accomplishments of Lundqvist in the NHL by saying it was only for a very short while. Then he pooh poohs Lundqvist's international accomplishments and extols the greatness of Montoya in the AHL, a league vastly inferior to international competition.
He hasn't pooh pooh's anything from Lundqvist, the difference is that most of us can see and KNOW what Lundqvist has done. All TB has said is that he'd like to see just what Montoya CAN become.

I think the argument of too short a time to make judgement has been fairly made for BOTH goalies. Lundqvist with all of 50 NHL games and Montoya with all of 40AHL games. That is a point that has honestly been hammered home repeatedly, again and again.

And the AHL isn't vastly inferior to the average european league at all. If anything the AHL tends to feature a greater number of future NHL'ers and former guys.

Comparing what both guys did at 20/21 in the respective league's is VERY reasonable.

Quote:
To me there is a tremendous disparity in how he judges them with the central argument being Montoya is younger. That's wonderful that he is younger but so are a thousand other players out there. This need to put Montoya at the same level, and in his case, sometimes at a higher level is confounding to me. Like I've said earlier I think it's part of the syndrome of hoping to see the next "coming" while not appreciating in the least that you have already struck gold.
The comparison and the younger comments come from a comparison to where Lundqvist was at the SAME age. That is what people are referring to. Comparing where both goalies were at 20/21 is a VERY reasonable argument. Comparing a 24 year old and a 21 year is not.

Quote:
It's obvious to everyone now that I disagree with you and TB on this stuff so instead of taking verbal swings at me i.e. saying that I'm twisting his words, why not step back and admit that this all stems from our differences on if Montoya should be considered a current trade option.
The problem is that in almost every conversation you have, you have several problems with the argument you're presenting.

A. It fails to acknowledge and address the opposing view, but instead argues within it's own points and pre-established parameters.

B. It often fails to acknowledge the historical proof that is presented. It counters that with simple opinion. Opinion is great, but there has to be some degree of evidence presented to support that belief.

C. Whether intentional or not, it does twist the opposing views. Thus the person you're arguing ends up repeating themself and you end up kind of never really acknowleding what they are saying to you. Unfortunatly this is a problem I've seen several times. It has nothing to do with the opposite view, it has everything to do with how you're presenting that view.

Quote:
Put that argument aside and tell me that the two of you don't consistently speak of the vast potential of Montoya and really never take the same stance with Lundqvist.
On the contrary we often talk of Lundqvists accomplishments. The difference is in the way people approach those accomplishments.

Lundqvist plays 50 games and people are ready to hang his jersey from the rafters.

Montoya plays 40 games and people can't wait to make a trade.

People see Lundqvist, they know what they've got already. There's very little to point out that people haven't seen. He's one of the top goalies in the league, in a nutshell anything else is just repeating the same thing.

You know why the vast potential of Montoya is mentioned?

Because people see similar things, at a similar age to what Lundqvist did. In some cases they see a little more. So after seeing the way Lundqvist turned out after what he accomplished by the age of 21, people are VERY interested in what Montoya will do have seeing what he also accomplished by the age of 21.

Simply put people place Montoya right on the same level, maybe even a hair ahead of where Lundqvist was after his 21st birthday. Just like they wouldn't have traded Lundqvist after what he accomplished at the same point, it doesn't make sense to trade a player who has done as much or a little more at the same point in development.

Take a look a the general opinion of Montoya now after turning 21 and compare it to 2003 when Lundqvist was coming up. THAT is why people want to wait and see and why their certainly is a possibility that Montoya could be even better.

Even if we don't believe his accomplishments aren't as good as Lundqvist, we can't argue that it's very far behind. In as much if Lundqvist is (for aguments sake) the third best goalie in the NHL and Montoya round out at the 8th, Montoya's value would still be higher than it is now. How do we figure that? About 75 years of NHL history, in writing and in action that shows 20 year old goalies don't bring back much. So if they don't bring back much and there is no indication from anyone that the trend is about to change, what is really to gain by moving him?

Yes hypothetically if teams did that and there was a player to be had for Montoya than we could go down that the path. But there have never been deals of that nature and there don't appear to be any now so how the hypothesis becomes pretty darn useless because it never happens.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2006, 10:42 AM
  #63
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
Honestly, I do not believe you are. Simply because I've seen it in my own discussions with you and I've seen you do it multiple times. I find TB having similar arguments with you that I have, in which his opinion is stated multiple times and twisted to the point where you're essentially arguing him on a point he is not making.



There is nothing that is downplaying Lundqvist, the reason the conversation goes back to Montoya is simply because he is the one who is being looked at to be traded.



The problem is you keep comparing a 24 year old Lundqvist to a 21 year old Montoya. What has been repeatedly mentioned is where they both were at 20/21. So the question becomes, if Montoya at the same age is right where Lundqvist has (maybe even a little ahead) how is it so impossible that he won't become as good or even little better? That's where the problem comes in.

The other problem is that examples have been provided or similar goalie situations in which the latter goalie did turn out to be better, despite some VERY impressive accomplishments early in the career.

Unfortunatly, just like the history of trades involving 20/21 year old goalies, you seem unwilling to acknowledge that as a point. If we can't acknowledge what has already been seen, than the debate starts to fall apart. Once again I see that happening, and this wasn't even a discussion that I was engaged in with you.




He hasn't pooh pooh's anything from Lundqvist, the difference is that most of us can see and KNOW what Lundqvist has done. All TB has said is that he'd like to see just what Montoya CAN become.

I think the argument of too short a time to make judgement has been fairly made for BOTH goalies. Lundqvist with all of 50 NHL games and Montoya with all of 40AHL games. That is a point that has honestly been hammered home repeatedly, again and again.

And the AHL isn't vastly inferior to the average european league at all. If anything the AHL tends to feature a greater number of future NHL'ers and former guys.

Comparing what both guys did at 20/21 in the respective league's is VERY reasonable.



The comparison and the younger comments come from a comparison to where Lundqvist was at the SAME age. That is what people are referring to. Comparing where both goalies were at 20/21 is a VERY reasonable argument. Comparing a 24 year old and a 21 year is not.



The problem is that in almost every conversation you have, you have several problems with the argument you're presenting.

A. It fails to acknowledge and address the opposing view, but instead argues within it's own points and pre-established parameters.

B. It often fails to acknowledge the historical proof that is presented. It counters that with simple opinion. Opinion is great, but there has to be some degree of evidence presented to support that belief.

C. Whether intentional or not, it does twist the opposing views. Thus the person you're arguing ends up repeating themself and you end up kind of never really acknowleding what they are saying to you. Unfortunatly this is a problem I've seen several times. It has nothing to do with the opposite view, it has everything to do with how you're presenting that view.



On the contrary we often talk of Lundqvists accomplishments. The difference is in the way people approach those accomplishments.

Lundqvist plays 50 games and people are ready to hang his jersey from the rafters.

Montoya plays 40 games and people can't wait to make a trade.

People see Lundqvist, they know what they've got already. There's very little to point out that people haven't seen. He's one of the top goalies in the league, in a nutshell anything else is just repeating the same thing.

You know why the vast potential of Montoya is mentioned?

Because people see similar things, at a similar age to what Lundqvist did. In some cases they see a little more. So after seeing the way Lundqvist turned out after what he accomplished by the age of 21, people are VERY interested in what Montoya will do have seeing what he also accomplished by the age of 21.

Simply put people place Montoya right on the same level, maybe even a hair ahead of where Lundqvist was after his 21st birthday. Just like they wouldn't have traded Lundqvist after what he accomplished at the same point, it doesn't make sense to trade a player who has done as much or a little more at the same point in development.

Take a look a the general opinion of Montoya now after turning 21 and compare it to 2003 when Lundqvist was coming up. THAT is why people want to wait and see and why their certainly is a possibility that Montoya could be even better.

Even if we don't believe his accomplishments aren't as good as Lundqvist, we can't argue that it's very far behind. In as much if Lundqvist is (for aguments sake) the third best goalie in the NHL and Montoya round out at the 8th, Montoya's value would still be higher than it is now. How do we figure that? About 75 years of NHL history, in writing and in action that shows 20 year old goalies don't bring back much. So if they don't bring back much and there is no indication from anyone that the trend is about to change, what is really to gain by moving him?

Yes hypothetically if teams did that and there was a player to be had for Montoya than we could go down that the path. But there have never been deals of that nature and there don't appear to be any now so how the hypothesis becomes pretty darn useless because it never happens.
You seem to have missed my central point. Maybe it wasn't presented clearly enough.

You both repeatedly talk about Montoya's potential future value without ever once talking of Lundqvist's possible future potential. Am I to surmise that you both already know how good Lundqvist can be or that he has topped out? Is 24 when we know the value of a goaltender?

Your assertion that my argument is off point is your opinion. I would claim its the exact reverse in this thread. The thread has absolutely nothing to do with trading Montoya as opposed to not trading him. You keep harping back to the trade portion of the discussion but that's just not what this discussion is about.

Perhaps in this case it is you who is having a problem staying on point.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2006, 11:10 AM
  #64
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
You seem to have missed my central point. Maybe it wasn't presented clearly enough.

You both repeatedly talk about Montoya's potential future value without ever once talking of Lundqvist's possible future potential. Am I to surmise that you both already know how good Lundqvist can be or that he has topped out? Is 24 when we know the value of a goaltender?

Your assertion that my argument is off point is your opinion. I would claim its the exact reverse in this thread. The thread has absolutely nothing to do with trading Montoya as opposed to not trading him. You keep harping back to the trade portion of the discussion but that's just not what this discussion is about.

Perhaps in this case it is you who is having a problem staying on point.

Case in point, you continue to argue with yourself and not address a single opposing position.

This is why you get yourself into these situation in now two seperate threads.

At first you thought it was just me, than probably just TB and myself.

But at what point does it start to sink in?

It is everybody else or is it really you?

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2006, 03:59 AM
  #65
donpaulo
Capt Barry Beck
 
donpaulo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: nihon
Country: Japan
Posts: 1,608
vCash: 500
al or henrik ?

that is easy to answer


YES PLEASE !!!

(futari hoshi desu)

donpaulo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2006, 06:07 AM
  #66
Finest
Puck Fittsburg
 
Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 5,587
vCash: 500
For those who disagree with this comparison take a look at this one. Lundqvist vs. Roloson http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=287457

Finest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2006, 05:58 PM
  #67
Ranger35
Proud of NYR
 
Ranger35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: Israel
Posts: 3,461
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Ranger35
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingHenrik35 View Post
For those who disagree with this comparison take a look at this one. Lundqvist vs. Roloson http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=287457
Some people in that thread are killing me.

Ranger35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2006, 06:52 PM
  #68
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
Case in point, you continue to argue with yourself and not address a single opposing position.

This is why you get yourself into these situation in now two seperate threads.

At first you thought it was just me, than probably just TB and myself.

But at what point does it start to sink in?

It is everybody else or is it really you?
When one defines everyone else as between 2-5 people (closer to two) I have to laugh at the pompousness being expressed. If you think I'm arguing with myself then one can only wonder why you feel the need to express countering opinions. Which one of me do you feel you are arguing with?

Exactly, what sort of situation do you feel I'm in? In disagreement with a few posters? I should probably feel terrible shame but I don't. Perhaps you feel the need to be in a majority groupthink.


Last edited by chosen: 09-10-2006 at 06:59 PM.
chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2006, 08:26 PM
  #69
Finest
Puck Fittsburg
 
Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 5,587
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger35 View Post
Some people in that thread are killing me.
You and me both, it hurts my brian to read some of that stuff

Finest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2006, 09:31 PM
  #70
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,532
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Taking Belfour over Hasek would be indisputably wrong.
Belfour's a hall-of-famer just like Hasek, he's won a Stanley Cup just like Hasek

Belfour 457-303 2.47 .907 75 SO
Hasek 324-202 2.22 .924 68 SO


Hasek is/was better. but I think even if Hasek stayed with that aging Chicago team the difference in the standings would be minimal. Overall, whether you had Hasek or Belfour in the nest in the mid-to-late 90's, you're winning 45-50 games a season IMO.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 08:26 AM
  #71
WheresBarnaby
Registered User
 
WheresBarnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 2,607
vCash: 500
Henrik Lundqvist is in good company, if he keeps it up.

GP W L OT GAA TOI SV% SO TGA TSA ENG PIM
52 30 11 9 2.18 3052 .924 2 111 1453 2 0

WheresBarnaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 12:28 PM
  #72
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
When one defines everyone else as between 2-5 people (closer to two) I have to laugh at the pompousness being expressed. If you think I'm arguing with myself then one can only wonder why you feel the need to express countering opinions. Which one of me do you feel you are arguing with?

Exactly, what sort of situation do you feel I'm in? In disagreement with a few posters? I should probably feel terrible shame but I don't. Perhaps you feel the need to be in a majority groupthink.
How do you figure closer to two, you had even someone else call out your approach in another thread.

Again it's not your opinion, it's the fact throughout this whole thread (and like the ones before it) you still have yet to address the counter points.

So like I do every time we discuss this, let me summarize them.

1. The comparison between Montoya and Lundqvist at the same age.

2. The accomplishments of Montoya and Lundqvist at the same age.

3. The history, with far more examples than a classification or rare, of the younger goalie passing even a great performance of an older guy.

4. The response to your feeling that the opposing view does not give Lundqvist the credit he deserves, despite the fact that the same things were said when he was Al's age and he has gotten props by that opposing side throughout the season.

It has nothing to do with groupthink or that you and I agree.

Honestly if we agree that's fine or disagree that's fine as well, discussions happen BECAUSE of those differences. The part where it falls apart is that whether you realize it or not, you don't actually defend your view. You take it personally and consider it (as you put it) a "smack" on you rather than saying "Well I believe this because A, B,C. And while you believe and have pointed to 1,2, 3 I don't agree with it because of these reasons".

Again nothing to do with what you believe, but the fact that you often just leave it dangling in the wind without any support. If someone can offer a counterpoint that goes unaddressed it hurts your argument. What's really funny is that while you insist on thinking I'm "smacking" or "attacking" you, the reality is that I'm actually giving you the chance to actually build upon your ideas and go into greater detail in your opposing view from mine.


Last edited by Edge: 09-11-2006 at 12:39 PM.
Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 07:07 PM
  #73
hdw
Registered User
 
hdw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Stockholm
Country: Sweden
Posts: 6,498
vCash: 500
At the same age

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
How do you figure closer to two, you had even someone else call out your approach in another thread.

Again it's not your opinion, it's the fact throughout this whole thread (and like the ones before it) you still have yet to address the counter points.

So like I do every time we discuss this, let me summarize them.

1. The comparison between Montoya and Lundqvist at the same age.

2. The accomplishments of Montoya and Lundqvist at the same age.
And 4 years ago Lundqvist was Swedish junior player of the year.
3 years ago he was awarded best goalie in SEL, lead Indians to the SEL championship and took the national team to a silver in the WC.

// hdw

hdw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 07:30 PM
  #74
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hdw View Post
And 4 years ago Lundqvist was Swedish junior player of the year.
3 years ago he was awarded best goalie in SEL, lead Indians to the SEL championship and took the national team to a silver in the WC.

// hdw
And by the same age Montoya had backstopped backstopped a team to a WJC where he was named the best goaltender in the tournament, was an AHL all-star and was one of the top goalies in the league before getting hurt where he would've challanged for the top goaltending honor.

He was also:

Named to Central Collegiate Hockey Association All-Tournament Team, 2002-03.
Named to Central Collegiate Hockey Association All-Rookie Team, 2002-03.
Named to Central Collegiate Hockey Association All-Star Second Team, 2003-04.
Named to National Collegiate Athletic Association (West) All-American Second Team, 2003-04.

Named the Most Outstanding Player of the NCAA Midwest Regional and selected to the CCHA Super Six All-Tournament team

Led the United States U-17 team the to the gold medal at the World U-17

Challenge in Winnipeg, Manitoba … Helped the U-17 team capture gold at the 2001 Four Nations Tournament in Slovakia.

We can list a ton of awards for both guys and that's a testament to how good they both are.

There statement isn't that Montoya WILL be better than Lundqvist (as it somehow keeps getting twisted into) it's that he COULD.

My position is how it always has been, I'm not picking either one right now because I'd much rather see where Montoya is at the age 0f 24 and how Lundqvist does as well.

Heck if the best goalie (however unlikely) is Chris Holt, I'd be happy. Just so long as the Rangers keep THAT guy.


Last edited by Edge: 09-11-2006 at 08:06 PM. Reason: Want to add that my comparison of Montoya's accomplishment was meant to be compared to Lundqvists junior level accomplishments, as was the AHL to Swedish pro. Realized it might be confused.
Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 08:14 PM
  #75
Ranger35
Proud of NYR
 
Ranger35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: Israel
Posts: 3,461
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Ranger35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post

Heck if the best goalie (however unlikely) is Chris Holt, I'd be happy. Just so long as the Rangers keep THAT guy.

Ranger35 is offline   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 12:10 AM.

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.