HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

HOH Top 40 Goaltenders of All Time

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-19-2013, 04:07 PM
  #226
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Grace Personified
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,685
vCash: 500
Adaptation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Mike

Making things way too complex. Since the introduction of the two blue lines to hockey., the idea has been to keep the opposing team's puck possession outside the defensive zone (blue line) while transitioning the puck out of the defensive zone to the offensive zone and sustaining pressure in the opponents defensive zone.Chances of scoring against a goalie from outside the blue line have always been minute to negligible.

There are three main components to judging the effectiveness of a team's overall defensive performance. In terms of the order in which they happen:

1.) The total number of times an offensive team crosses the blue line in possession of the puck or gains possession of the puck in the offensive zone (turnover,face-off win). Turnover here has the widest possible definition. Note it is possible to generate multiple turnovers or face-offs from one blue line crossing, likewise multiple shots but the result is always zero or one goals.

2.) The actual game time the puck spends in a team's defensive zone or inside their blue line.

3.) The actual Goals Allowed as opposed to GAA. Team allowing the fewest goals over the course of a schedule has the best chance of winning.

The rest of the generated stats are simply descriptive of the above.
Bolded: Has the ability to keep pucks out of your own zone been compromised by the removal of the center red line? The utilization of the stretch pass to the far blue line for a tip in deep and establish zone time was not possible in the same way before 2005. Fair to say?

So the adaptation is to protect what you can protect. You can't protect your own blue line like you could ten years ago. So you protect your net. In the process, you try to mitigate zone time but teams with the higher defensive reputation seem largely resigned to yielding their line and protecting their net.

That's not to say anything in absolutes league-wide. Teams don't want the puck in their own zone. Look at the Blackhawks: all puck possession. The Blackhawks so-so goaltenders have alarming statistics because the other team isn't allowed to touch the puck during the game. Not because the Blackhawks are a traditional defensive team.

If a coach has a choice, yeah, he wouldn't want a puck to cross his blueline the entire game. But that task can prove to be exhausting in this era, and so adjustments were made...

Mike Farkas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-19-2013, 04:38 PM
  #227
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,070
vCash: 500
Face-offs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
Bolded: Has the ability to keep pucks out of your own zone been compromised by the removal of the center red line? The utilization of the stretch pass to the far blue line for a tip in deep and establish zone time was not possible in the same way before 2005. Fair to say?

So the adaptation is to protect what you can protect. You can't protect your own blue line like you could ten years ago. So you protect your net. In the process, you try to mitigate zone time but teams with the higher defensive reputation seem largely resigned to yielding their line and protecting their net.

That's not to say anything in absolutes league-wide. Teams don't want the puck in their own zone. Look at the Blackhawks: all puck possession. The Blackhawks so-so goaltenders have alarming statistics because the other team isn't allowed to touch the puck during the game. Not because the Blackhawks are a traditional defensive team.

If a coach has a choice, yeah, he wouldn't want a puck to cross his blueline the entire game. But that task can prove to be exhausting in this era, and so adjustments were made...
Changes to face-off rules have had the biggest impact. Penalties, icings, puck out of play all favour the offensive team either via no change,location - one of two defensive spots as opposed to neutral zone or point of deflection.

Tip in is Bowman's pet peeve. Cost of poor execution and the lack of turnover guarantee make this ploy iffy.

The basic issue is that with a salary cap and free agency teams no longer have a strong veteran core that can play various defensive tactics with equal efficiency. So teams stockpile centers and defensemen with attention to handedness. Efficiency at faceoffs and transition is then enhanced.

See Ottawa. Balanced handedness with centers and defensemen plus depth. Or LA, Chicago.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-19-2013, 05:52 PM
  #228
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 9,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
2006-07 in NJ, Brodeur faced his career high in SA and had the only season in his career with > 2000 saves. Despite a solid defensive forward group and very responsible defensemen. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of Claude Julien's system.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...brodema01.html

Explains the late season dismissal.

More or less Julien's downfall in Montreal combined with losing the room by acting like a junior coach. BTW he did have solid faceoff centers in Montreal - Yanic Perreault, plus Joe Juneau.

Boston. Suggest looking at the 2007-08 season when Patrice Bergeron was hurt playing only 10 games. Then going forward from 2008-09 with a healthy Bergeron and tracking the goalie stats for Thomas and Rask. Bergeron is the most complete NHL center, a RHS who is elite on face-offs. Balanced with David Krejci a LHS plus two more RHS at center - Tyler Seguin and Rich Peverley and the Bruins have a strong edge at center.
Reality is that without Julien, Boston would have a healthy Bergeron plus center depth with specialty attributes, whose skills would not change nor would Zdeno Chara lose height and reach.
Krejci's a RHS, not left.

Seguin's played center 1 game this year. Peverley has played mostly wing.

Kelly, a lefty, usually plays center on the 3rd line.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-19-2013, 05:59 PM
  #229
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Thomas was a mediocre NHL goalie before Julien, and with Rask, we have no other relevant sample to use for comparison.
Thomas finished 7th in save percentage in his rookie season despite playing all 38 of his games in the Bruins' final 41 games of the season. That's a lot of hockey without much rest on a bottom-five team, and not at all a mediocre finish (this was the year Raycroft played his way off of the team with his .879 and into a trade for prospect Tuukka Rask). The Bruins took an obscene amount of penalties the next season, so while Thomas' even-strength save percentage only dipped from a .925 to a .920, his cumulative numbers were killed. Julien helped return the team to their pre-2007 level of penalties (and for this, he deserves a lot of credit), and Thomas ascended to 4th in save percentage.

As for Alex Auld, he was sitting below a .900 all season long until March (at the time, Thomas had a .925), so Julien wasn't really working any miracles with him until a late-season hot streak against middling teams like Toronto, Buffalo, Washington, Ottawa, and Florida skewed his statistics into something more resembling a quality goaltender.

And where was the Julien effect on Manny Fernandez? Fernandez put up excellent statistics in Dallas and Minnesota (once placing higher through 24 games than official league leader Ed Belfour on the same team) but couldn't get closer than .023 from Tim Thomas in 2009. Rask, himself, was .020 away in 2011, and he's one hell of a goaltender.

Naming Khudobin is weak. First of all, stop the presses because he was a .955 goaltender before Julien ever got his hands on him, and the sample size hasn't gotten much bigger (6 games to 15). A .920 backup in a league average .912 is supposed to invalidate two Vezinas and a Conn Smythe because of coaching? Biron and Bernier have done the same thing in New York and Los Angeles, so take Lundqvist's and Quick's trophies too.


I mean, Tim Thomas' peak wasn't that long ago, so I'm not going to be sold on this being all about Claude Julien. I didn't buy it in 2010, and I'm not buying it now; Tim Thomas was an excellent goaltender. I've seen the quality and quantity of shots he faced with my own eyes - particularly ones in pressure situations. If someone wants to argue it was mostly coaching (just because Tuukka Rask is also a very good goaltender), it's an argument best saved for twenty years later with someone who didn't see him.

Some teams have two great players at the same position. It happens. And it has as much to do with scouting as coaching, as the United States and Finland have been putting out some quality products for a while.

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-19-2013, 06:28 PM
  #230
ContrarianGoaltender
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
It's really hard to explain, particularly because it doesn't show up in shot quality as strongly as one would like either, but the effect is definitely there. Look at Khudobin, and like Mike said, the season with Auld. Julien also did this with other goalies before these two. Thomas was a mediocre NHL goalie before Julien, and with Rask, we have no other relevant sample to use for comparison.
I have to echo QPQ here that you're cherry-picking and overstating the Boston shot quality case. Why shouldn't we consider Fernandez and Turco as well? The non-Thomas, non-Rask Boston save percentage under Claude Julien with this year's numbers included is still only .909 on 2007 shots, which is still below league average for the time period.

And again I'd like to point out the inconsistency of using backup numbers for Thomas under Julien while not considering backup numbers for Thomas pre-Julien. In '05-06 and '06-07 Thomas at .909 while his Boston teammates combined for .891. .909 vs .891 is almost exactly the same thing as .926 vs .909, which is Thomas vs. non-Rask teammates under Julien. Do backup numbers and shot quality matter, or do they not?

The fact that Khudobin made three more saves than an average goalie in 388 shots this year is far from any kind of decisive blow in this debate. Khudobin's save percentage split was .916 at even strength and .939 on the PK. That's not what you expect to see when a coach is propping up a goalie with a strong defensive system, that's often what you see when an average goalie hits an unsustainable hot streak on special teams (although it is a very small sample size, so it's impossible to really make any conclusions at all from that data). Compare that to Rask in 2012-13: .938 at EV and .865 while shorthanded, which looks a lot more like a very good goalie probably getting a bit of a shot quality boost at 5 on 5.

BOS EV SV% under Julien: Thomas .933, Rask .933, Everybody else .922

If it is entirely a case of Julien making his goalies look good, then he's the most valuable individual in all of hockey. Boston's save percentage under Julien is .924 compared to .911 league average, making them 180 goals better than average over 458 GP. That means that Boston outperforms expected save percentage by 32.2 goals per 82 games, and going by the quick rule of thumb that 3 GD costs about $1 million means that Julien is worth $10.7 million more per year than an average coach. That's well above the highest cap hit of any player in the league, and that's compared to average, not replacement, which means he would actually be even more valuable than that.

Even assume Julien's impact is only responsible for half of the team's outperformance, and he's still being underpaid by a factor of at least 4 or 5, which still makes him one of the most valuable hockey people in the world. And if we go further to suggest that it's only one-third or one-quarter from coaching effects, to make his salary vs. performance seem much more reasonable, then we're in essence agreeing that Thomas and Rask are both excellent goalies with true talent levels of .010+ above league average, which means they're good enough to be talked about in a top 40 context anyway.

I can get behind some Boston shot quality effect, but not enough to say that Rask and Thomas aren't very good goalies. Seems to me there's either a huge market failure here involving probably the greatest coach ever, or else just maybe Boston managed to get their hands on two top goaltenders at the same time and boosted their stats slightly with strong defensive play.

ContrarianGoaltender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-19-2013, 07:50 PM
  #231
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,070
vCash: 500
Winning

Still coaches are hired to win. When the keystrokes are read about the merits of Claude Julien's alleged SV% system, reality comes calling. Compared to nonSV% coaches.

Playoff coaching record going into the 2013 playoffs.

Claude Julien 36W/34L

Mike Babcock 71W/45L

Dan Bylsma 28W/22L

Randy Carlyle 36W/26L

Draw your own conclusions.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-19-2013, 07:58 PM
  #232
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 9,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Still coaches are hired to win. When the keystrokes are read about the merits of Claude Julien's alleged SV% system, reality comes calling. Compared to nonSV% coaches.

Playoff coaching record going into the 2013 playoffs.

Claude Julien 36W/34L

Mike Babcock 71W/45L

Dan Bylsma 28W/22L

Randy Carlyle 36W/26L

Draw your own conclusions.
Gee, 3 coaches that had teams with way more talented teams have better records.

Don't go out on a limb too much.

And Julien's record is 40W/34L, 36-27 with Boston.


Last edited by Dennis Bonvie: 05-20-2013 at 05:32 PM.
Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2013, 11:29 AM
  #233
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
Still, Brodeur posted the second highest save pct. of his storied career that year
Thkis was a pattern with Julien. Can you post some stuff from your MLD bio?

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
As for Alex Auld, he was sitting below a .900 all season long until March (at the time, Thomas had a .925), so Julien wasn't really working any miracles with him until a late-season hot streak against middling teams like Toronto, Buffalo, Washington, Ottawa, and Florida skewed his statistics into something more resembling a quality goaltender.
that is cherrypicking. You're saying that smaller sample sizes are more important than larger ones now.

Quote:
And where was the Julien effect on Manny Fernandez? Fernandez put up excellent statistics in Dallas and Minnesota (once placing higher through 24 games than official league leader Ed Belfour on the same team) but couldn't get closer than .023 from Tim Thomas in 2009. Rask, himself, was .020 away in 2011, and he's one hell of a goaltender.
Hey, I never said Thomas was a bad goalie. Or that Fernandez at age 34 was a good one, either. I'm not trying to argue that any schmuck would have posetd the same numbers, only that Julien played a significant part.

Quote:
Naming Khudobin is weak. First of all, stop the presses because he was a .955 goaltender before Julien ever got his hands on him, and the sample size hasn't gotten much bigger (6 games to 15).
Let's try to stick to serious arguments, ok?

Quote:
A .920 backup in a league average .912 is supposed to invalidate two Vezinas and a Conn Smythe because of coaching? Biron and Bernier have done the same thing in New York and Los Angeles, so take Lundqvist's and Quick's trophies too.
First, no one's trying to "invalidate" anything, just put it in proper context. Second, the fact that even a mediocre backup was .920 in Boston this season helps my case... not yours. (it would be nice if we had a better sample for him, but we don't) Third, we do have better sample sizes for New York and Los Angeles (not cherrypicked single seasons that apparently allow us to claim they're "doing the same thing"), and the long term results show the starters are clearly outperforming the backups. Significantly, in Lundqvist's case.

Quote:
I mean, Tim Thomas' peak wasn't that long ago, so I'm not going to be sold on this being all about Claude Julien. I didn't buy it in 2010, and I'm not buying it now; Tim Thomas was an excellent goaltender. I've seen the quality and quantity of shots he faced with my own eyes - particularly ones in pressure situations. If someone wants to argue it was mostly coaching (just because Tuukka Rask is also a very good goaltender), it's an argument best saved for twenty years later with someone who didn't see him.
It is not "all" coaching, and it doesn't even have to be "mostly" coaching. But coaching has something to do with this. This phenomenon has followed Julien around for a while now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianGoaltender View Post
And again I'd like to point out the inconsistency of using backup numbers for Thomas under Julien while not considering backup numbers for Thomas pre-Julien.**In '05-06 and '06-07 Thomas at .909 while his Boston teammates combined for .891.**.909 vs .891 is almost exactly the same thing as .926 vs .909, which is Thomas vs. non-Rask teammates under Julien.**Do backup numbers and shot quality matter, or do they not?
Where did you get the idea that I was not including 2006 and 2007? In the other thread where I posted the cumulative numbers, those were complete post-lockout totals. Thomas' overall outperforming of the other backups has been consistent and fairly significant, but it has not been otherworldly. Other goalies have managed to do the same or better. Of course, the caveat to that is that maybe Rask and Thomas are both truly elite, devaluing the :"vs. backups" stat for them, but that's only a maybe. If that's true, then your stat that indicates both are*11 sv% points ahead of run-of-the-mill backups. I wouldn't dispute that. But remember, 11 points isn't that special either.

Quote:
If it is entirely a case of Julien making his goalies look good, then he's the most valuable individual in all of hockey.**Boston's save percentage under Julien is .924 compared to .911 league average, making them 180 goals better than average over 458 GP.**That means that Boston outperforms expected save percentage by 32.2 goals per 82 games, and going by the quick rule of thumb that 3 GD costs about $1 million means that Julien is worth $10.7 million more per year than an average coach.**That's well above the highest cap hit of any player in the league, and that's compared to average, not replacement, which means he would actually be even more valuable than that.

Even assume Julien's impact is only responsible for half of the team's outperformance, and he's still being underpaid by a factor of at least 4 or 5, which still makes him one of the most valuable hockey people in the world.**And if we go further to suggest that it's only one-third or one-quarter from coaching effects, to make his salary vs. performance seem much more reasonable, then we're in essence agreeing that Thomas and Rask are both excellent goalies with true talent levels of .010+ above league average, which means they're good enough to be talked about in a top 40 context anyway.
There's one thing you're missing, and that is that Julien's style tends to create or allow more shots against. So the number you're quoting, 180 goals better than average, is based on the assumption that they'd "normally" allow that many more shots. I don't think it would be in that ballpark. they've averaged 19th best in shots allowed during his time in Boston, which is conunterintuitive to take at face value considering the personnel and Julien's reputation. His actual value can be represented in the fewer number of goals the team allows, independent of shot totals. And could he be worth roughly half of that? Considering his history, yeah, I think that's definitely in the realm of possibility.

Quote:
I can get behind some Boston shot quality effect, but not enough to say that Rask and Thomas aren't very good goalies.**Seems to me there's either a huge market failure here involving probably the greatest coach ever, or else just maybe Boston managed to get their hands on two top goaltenders at the same time and boosted their stats slightly with strong defensive play.
No, they're both very good. But let's be careful not to throw hyperbole around as well. This isn't unprecedented. The same thing has been happening in Phoenix. They picked Bryzgalov off the scrap heap, he suddenly placed top-5 in Hart voting, earned a massive contract, Smith comes in off the same scrap heap and leads the league in GVT; meanwhile, Bryzgalov is earning the reputation as perhaps the worst starting goalie in the NHL. Hitchcock has been having a demonstrable effect on his goalies' numbers as well.


Last edited by seventieslord: 05-22-2013 at 11:51 AM.
seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2013, 08:43 AM
  #234
Cadienhomme
Rookie User
 
Cadienhomme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 22
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Clearly, everyone who doesn't agree with your exact order is just playing favorites.
cant explain things to people that will not listen and plays favs

Cadienhomme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2013, 10:23 PM
  #235
Victorious Secret
Eyebrows Defcon 1
 
Victorious Secret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Arkansas
Country: Ireland
Posts: 12,439
vCash: 500
I don't like seeing anyone above Hasek, but thats a damn good list.

Victorious Secret is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2013, 07:33 AM
  #236
Jabroni
The People's Champ
 
Jabroni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 7,101
vCash: 500
The vote totals for Roy and Hasek are so close, couldn't one make the distinction that there's a 1A/1B situation?

Jabroni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2013, 01:45 PM
  #237
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,139
vCash: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabroni View Post
The vote totals for Roy and Hasek are so close, couldn't one make the distinction that there's a 1A/1B situation?
Na not really. Hasek is number 1 and Roy 2.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 10:07 AM
  #238
ted1971
History Of Hockey
 
ted1971's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: south jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 2,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
Na not really. Hasek is number 1 and Roy 2.
Agreed. I think sometimes people don't realize on what Hasek was really worth to that Buffalo at the time. If Hasek wasn't the Goalie, Bufflao would've had a hard time even making the playoffs, let alone go to the finals. Hasek was a one man show for Buffalo for years, while Roy has never had to carry a franchise His back.

ted1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2013, 09:45 AM
  #239
Sabresfan124
Rookie User
 
Sabresfan124's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 3
vCash: 500
I think Curtis Joseph was an amazing goal tender without pressure. He was not a clutch player and that's probably why he's so high, but honestly I think he could/should be lower

Sabresfan124 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-05-2013, 10:07 PM
  #240
lifeisruff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: wny
Posts: 1,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Forsberg View Post
Glad to see Roy get the number one spot. Not that Hasek doesn't deserve it, but he gets overrated sometimes.
Really, Roy played behind MUCH better teams (in the NHL and Olympics) then Hasek did.

Also, I'm young so whatever, but Barrasso? Really? I was under the impression that he had one great year (his rookie year) and never match it again.

lifeisruff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2013, 03:47 AM
  #241
vippe
Registered User
 
vippe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 11,808
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to vippe
Surprised to see Hasek as #2. He's #1 in my books.

Also, Jiří Holeček that low?

I cant really see why Luongo should be ahead of Lundqvist either tbh. I know both goalies have many more years to go and that Lundqvist will be ahead sooner or later but other than playing more years what does Luongo have on Lundqvist?

I like him more than most on these boards but Lundqvist has a great resumé:
Best goalie SHL 03,04,05
MVP SHL 05
MVP as voted by players SHL 05
Vezina finalist 06,07,08,12,13
Hart Finalist 12
Lindsay Finalist 12
Vezina winner 12
First all-star team 12
Olympic gold 06
SHL gold 03, 05

vippe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2013, 06:36 AM
  #242
GuineaPig
Registered User
 
GuineaPig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Montréal
Posts: 2,143
vCash: 500
It's simple: Luongo's play has been better than Lundqvist. If you ignore the hardware, it's hard to pick Lundqvist over Luongo.

GuineaPig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 07:52 AM
  #243
Jabroni
The People's Champ
 
Jabroni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 7,101
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuineaPig View Post
It's simple: Luongo's play has been better than Lundqvist. If you ignore the hardware, it's hard to pick Lundqvist over Luongo.
That also has to do with Hank being*on some not-so-good teams. The 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 teams were not all that good.

__________________
Jabroni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 08:40 AM
  #244
GuineaPig
Registered User
 
GuineaPig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Montréal
Posts: 2,143
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabroni View Post
That also has to do with Hank being*on some not-so-good teams. The 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 teams were not all that good.
Lundqvist's bad teams have nothing on Luongo's bad teams.

GuineaPig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 10:19 AM
  #245
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,743
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
Na not really. Hasek is number 1 and Roy 2.
Apparently not.

Look, there were pages upon pages of heated posts over these two. Every pro and con for each was discussed at great length and then some.
I myself have trouble saying which one is #1 from year to year.
Hell, I think I even did have Hasek #1 when the thread started but it was Roy by the end and I wasn't the only one swayed obviously.


Either way, looking at it as a 1a and 1b is by far the best and most accurate way of looking at it.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 10:29 AM
  #246
Jabroni
The People's Champ
 
Jabroni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 7,101
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuineaPig View Post
Lundqvist's bad teams have nothing on Luongo's bad teams.
That's possible. The Rangers 08-09 team was really, really bad though. Was Lundqvist who got us to 7 games against the Caps.

Jabroni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 10:35 AM
  #247
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,743
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuineaPig View Post
Lundqvist's bad teams have nothing on Luongo's bad teams.
Here's the big difference though...
Luongo stands out when he was on bad teams but he hasn't stood out much on good ones.
Lundqvist on the other hand has stood out in either case.

Great goalies make bad teams good and good teams great. Luongo has only managed the former.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 11:46 AM
  #248
bigbuffalo313
Registered User
 
bigbuffalo313's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 3,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuineaPig View Post
Lundqvist's bad teams have nothing on Luongo's bad teams.
The only team Lundqvist has been on that should have made the playoffs was the 2012 team and Lndqvist took them to first in the east and the conference finals. That team had no business there

bigbuffalo313 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 12:17 PM
  #249
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,139
vCash: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbuffalo313 View Post
The only team Lundqvist has been on that should have made the playoffs was the 2012 team and Lndqvist took them to first in the east and the conference finals. That team had no business there
That's redicoulous man. The team he is on right now has excellent depth and no excuses.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 01:23 PM
  #250
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,743
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
That's redicoulous man. The team he is on right now has excellent depth and no excuses.
And can the same not be said of Luongo to an even greater degree?

Rhiessan71 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 07:49 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.