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.

Have we ever had a truly generational goalie?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-06-2012, 10:22 AM
  #76
Cheddabombs
Status Quo
 
Cheddabombs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,103
vCash: 500
Hasek is the first name that comes to mind. Roy and Brodeur (homer in me but an argument can easily be made) are very close behind him though.

Cheddabombs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 10:30 AM
  #77
cgf
Registered User
 
cgf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 10,906
vCash: 500
We already had two that played against each other. Hasek and Roy did things we won't see goalies doing for a very long time.

cgf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 10:34 AM
  #78
NyQuil
Setec Astronomy
 
NyQuil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 42,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgf View Post
We already had two that played against each other. Hasek and Roy did things we won't see goalies doing for a very long time.



NyQuil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 10:35 AM
  #79
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 25,570
vCash: 10592
Pelle Lindbergh should be in the conversation too.

coldsteelonice84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 10:37 AM
  #80
JetsAlternate
Registered User
 
JetsAlternate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,438
vCash: 500
I don't suppose Ken Dryden should be considered part of the conversation. He was a 6'4'' goaltender in a league full of shorter netminders, though. He also won five Vezina trophies over the course of seven full NHL seasons. Apparently, the Habs' 1973-74 season is proof that Dryden played a large role in their success, as the team's goals against totals skyrocketed after he decided to put his career on hiatus that year.


Last edited by JetsAlternate: 09-06-2012 at 10:45 AM.
JetsAlternate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 10:38 AM
  #81
InfinityIggy
Inflammatory Poster
 
InfinityIggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,881
vCash: 133
Generational, yes: Brodeur, Roy, Hasek

As "legendary" as Gretzky, Lemieux or Orr?

I would say no. Those guys were Miles ahead of their competition, we would need so see a goalie who wins something like 3-4 Cups, 7-8 Vezina's, At least a couple Jennings, and have absurdly high Save % (.950) and low GGA (1.25 or lower) to be on the same level as those guys, in my opinion.

InfinityIggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 10:39 AM
  #82
NyQuil
Setec Astronomy
 
NyQuil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 42,855
vCash: 500
I'd say Hasek is pretty close. Roy and Brodeur have a lot of the hardware you're talking about.

Lemieux and Orr only won 2 Cups, why does a goalie have to win 3 or 4?

Not to mention, your statistical numbers are extremely era-sensitive.

But I get what you're saying. Hard to compare apples and oranges though.

NyQuil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 10:39 AM
  #83
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by InfinityIggy View Post
As "legendary" as Gretzky, Lemieux or Orr?

I would say no. Those guys were Miles ahead of their competition, we would need so see a goalie who wins something like 3-4 Cups
Neither of Orr and Mario won 3-4 Cups...

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 10:44 AM
  #84
InfinityIggy
Inflammatory Poster
 
InfinityIggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,881
vCash: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Neither of Orr and Mario won 3-4 Cups...
Might be a stretch on that one fair enough.

As for the statistical sensitivity, look at the % gap in production between Gretzky/Lemieux and their competition. It was a gap measured by 10's of % year over year.

When you look at career goal tending numbers of guys like Hasek/Brodeur/Roy while they do come out on top, they come out on top by only a few % points ahead of their competition.

InfinityIggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 11:01 AM
  #85
Johnny Engine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,318
vCash: 500
It's interesting that most of the defensemen and goalies I would consider to be a significant tier above their nearest all time competition are hard to consider "generational" because of when they played.

Plante and Harvey weren't the greatest players of the 50s, Bourque and Roy weren't the greatest players of the 80s and 90s. Even Hasek suffers from a "Gretzky and Lemieux hangover" of sorts.

In another thread like this, I attempted to make a conservative (one poster listed 70 players on his list, lol) list of "generational" players based not on decades, but on major epoch's in the game (pre-NHL, pre-war, 06, expansion, firewagon, deadpuck), and only Orr and Hasek fit the bill. It felt weird including guys like Bobby Hull, Howie Morenz and Cyclone Taylor, but not guys like Harvey and Roy.

Then you have people who use "generational" to explain the very palpable gap between the 4th best player of all-time (Mario), and whoever you think is the 5th best player is (there are at least 6 or 7 defensible answers here) There's no goalie in that group of 4.

Johnny Engine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 11:21 AM
  #86
The Latvian
#rooster #classless
 
The Latvian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,104
vCash: 500
Incredible to think Hasek didn't become a starter until he was 28. Imagine if circumstances were different back in the 80's, he probably would have had a longer career in the NHL and a bit more hardware.

The Latvian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 11:29 AM
  #87
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Morocco
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,053
vCash: 500
... there have been many "Generational Goalies" over the decades. As the saying goes, their a breed apart & therefore an entirely different set of criteria needs to be applied in order to ascertain who they are. Based not only on performance, but so too in terms of the contributions they made through innovation, how the position itself was/is played, including equipment (Emile "The Cat" Francis for example was the first goalie to use a catcher, a 1st basemans glove with added cuff) & techniques (Johnny Bowers contribution being the poke check as another eg) some major others minor. The "Big 3" Generational Goaltenders post WW2 would be Sawchuk, Plante & Hall in terms of both innovation/development & play/success, most of what followed all borrowing from their playbooks'. Fine tuned & elevated to even loftier levels by the likes of Parent, Dryden, Roy, Hasek etc, who in turn could accurately be described and defined as "Generational Goaltenders" themselves as they too contributed to the furtherance of the development of how the position is played while being tremendously successful themselves of course.

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 11:38 AM
  #88
Johnny Engine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,318
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
... there have been many "Generational Goalies" over the decades. As the saying goes, their a breed apart & therefore an entirely different set of criteria needs to be applied in order to ascertain who they are. Based not only on performance, but so too in terms of the contributions they made through innovation, how the position itself was/is played, including equipment (Emile "The Cat" Francis for example was the first goalie to use a catcher, a 1st basemans glove with added cuff) & techniques (Johnny Bowers contribution being the poke check as another eg) some major others minor. The "Big 3" Generational Goaltenders post WW2 would be Sawchuk, Plante & Hall in terms of both innovation/development & play/success, most of what followed all borrowing from their playbooks'. Fine tuned & elevated to even loftier levels by the likes of Parent, Dryden, Roy, Hasek etc, who in turn could accurately be described and defined as "Generational Goaltenders" themselves as they too contributed to the furtherance of the development of how the position is played while being tremendously successful themselves of course.
Problem with this is there is literally no bottom to things you can consider revolutionary changes to the game. Give me a goaltender who managed to play in the big leagues at all, and I'll tell you what they "brought" to the game.

Johnny Engine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 11:55 AM
  #89
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by InfinityIggy View Post
As for the statistical sensitivity, look at the % gap in production between Gretzky/Lemieux and their competition. It was a gap measured by 10's of % year over year.

When you look at career goal tending numbers of guys like Hasek/Brodeur/Roy while they do come out on top, they come out on top by only a few % points ahead of their competition.
Part of that, though, is a fallacy in assuming a 1-to-1 relationship between points and save% decimals.

Take Gretzky for example. In his best seasons, 1980-89, he scored 1837 points and the next-best player (Stastny) scored 986. Before we go on, let's just take a moment to absorb how friggin' incredible that is

... ok. So Gretzky scored 86% more points than anyone else. Now, how is that supposed to translate to goaltending? Is Hasek supposed to have a save% 86% better than anyone else? Like a 1.700 or something? That doesn't make any sense.

One reasonable method would be to consider the average save% in a given timeframe to be X, and to measure goalies by their save% minus X. That tells us the amount by which they exceeded the average, right? So if Hasek's save%-minus-X is 86% better than the next best goalie's, he is in Gretzky territory.

Hasek's best seasons were from 1994-1999. During that time, he put up a combined .930, and the next-best statistically relevant goalie was Patrick Roy with .915. During these seasons, the league average ("X") was roughly .902*. So, Roy was .013 over the average compared to Hasek's .028.

That's 115% of second place. Better than Gretzky's 86%.

I wouldn't believe it if I hadn't just done the math, but Hasek was more dominant over his competition during his peak than Gretzky was over his. Now, Gretzky's peak was twice as long, and that has to be kept in mind before we even think about putting Hasek on that level. But statistically, he has a serious argument to be considered "Gretzky level" at his peak, never mind "Lemieux level" or "Orr level".

* I got this number by combining the yearly averages and dividing by six. It would be cumbersome to find and average the actual total leaguewide save% for the period, and it's reasonable to assume the final number would still be .902.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 12:38 PM
  #90
PhillyBluesFan
Registered User
 
PhillyBluesFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,674
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard View Post
Those Montreal and Buffalo teams blend in with the mind as very similar; for their eras. Roy won two cups that, frankly, Montreal had no business winning.
The worst Montreal team Roy played on was better than the best Buffalo team that Hasek played on.

In 86 Montreal were extremely talent they had Naslund, Smith, Chelios, Lemiuex and Robinson. That core probable doesn't even need an elite goalie to compete for championships

In 93 Montreal was less talented but still had 5 all star caliber players with Savard, Bellows, Muller, Damphousse and Desjardins. I would argue that Cam Ward and Tim Thomas won with less talented teams.

PhillyBluesFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 12:43 PM
  #91
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,169
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AD1066 View Post
Head to head 1994-2002:



And playoff comparison:

Ugh, what is this supposed to prove? You removed Roy and Brodeur's primes and compare them head to head with Hasek's prime.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 12:45 PM
  #92
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,169
vCash: 500
IMO, Terry Sawchuk had a chance of becoming that generational goalie before his play declined due to the alcoholism.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 12:47 PM
  #93
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,432
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Part of that, though, is a fallacy in assuming a 1-to-1 relationship between points and save% decimals.

Take Gretzky for example. In his best seasons, 1980-89, he scored 1837 points and the next-best player (Stastny) scored 986. Before we go on, let's just take a moment to absorb how friggin' incredible that is

... ok. So Gretzky scored 86% more points than anyone else. Now, how is that supposed to translate to goaltending? Is Hasek supposed to have a save% 86% better than anyone else? Like a 1.700 or something? That doesn't make any sense.

One reasonable method would be to consider the average save% in a given timeframe to be X, and to measure goalies by their save% minus X. That tells us the amount by which they exceeded the average, right? So if Hasek's save%-minus-X is 86% better than the next best goalie's, he is in Gretzky territory.

Hasek's best seasons were from 1994-1999. During that time, he put up a combined .930, and the next-best statistically relevant goalie was Patrick Roy with .915. During these seasons, the league average ("X") was roughly .902*. So, Roy was .013 over the average compared to Hasek's .028.

That's 115% of second place. Better than Gretzky's 86%.

I wouldn't believe it if I hadn't just done the math, but Hasek was more dominant over his competition during his peak than Gretzky was over his. Now, Gretzky's peak was twice as long, and that has to be kept in mind before we even think about putting Hasek on that level. But statistically, he has a serious argument to be considered "Gretzky level" at his peak, never mind "Lemieux level" or "Orr level".

* I got this number by combining the yearly averages and dividing by six. It would be cumbersome to find and average the actual total leaguewide save% for the period, and it's reasonable to assume the final number would still be .902.
Hasek probably outpeaked Gordie Howe when it comes to dominance over peers. If hasek had a longer career, he would have easily overtaken Bobby Hull for 5th spot all-time, i feel the history section overrates hull.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 12:50 PM
  #94
InfinityIggy
Inflammatory Poster
 
InfinityIggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,881
vCash: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Part of that, though, is a fallacy in assuming a 1-to-1 relationship between points and save% decimals.

Take Gretzky for example. In his best seasons, 1980-89, he scored 1837 points and the next-best player (Stastny) scored 986. Before we go on, let's just take a moment to absorb how friggin' incredible that is

... ok. So Gretzky scored 86% more points than anyone else. Now, how is that supposed to translate to goaltending? Is Hasek supposed to have a save% 86% better than anyone else? Like a 1.700 or something? That doesn't make any sense.

One reasonable method would be to consider the average save% in a given timeframe to be X, and to measure goalies by their save% minus X. That tells us the amount by which they exceeded the average, right? So if Hasek's save%-minus-X is 86% better than the next best goalie's, he is in Gretzky territory.

Hasek's best seasons were from 1994-1999. During that time, he put up a combined .930, and the next-best statistically relevant goalie was Patrick Roy with .915. During these seasons, the league average ("X") was roughly .902*. So, Roy was .013 over the average compared to Hasek's .028.

That's 115% of second place. Better than Gretzky's 86%.

I wouldn't believe it if I hadn't just done the math, but Hasek was more dominant over his competition during his peak than Gretzky was over his. Now, Gretzky's peak was twice as long, and that has to be kept in mind before we even think about putting Hasek on that level. But statistically, he has a serious argument to be considered "Gretzky level" at his peak, never mind "Lemieux level" or "Orr level".

* I got this number by combining the yearly averages and dividing by six. It would be cumbersome to find and average the actual total leaguewide save% for the period, and it's reasonable to assume the final number would still be .902.
No thats obviously not what I am saying, I am saying it should be "shockingly" more, just like Gretzky's. So if the next highest was say... .920, .923, .925, then if his was say, .955 then I would call that a "shocking" difference.

InfinityIggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 12:56 PM
  #95
Doctor No
Retired
 
Doctor No's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 23,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by InfinityIggy View Post
No thats obviously not what I am saying, I am saying it should be "shockingly" more, just like Gretzky's. So if the next highest was say... .920, .923, .925, then if his was say, .955 then I would call that a "shocking" difference.
His (valid) point is that what Hasek did should be considered shocking.

Doctor No is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 01:01 PM
  #96
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,169
vCash: 500
If you're going to compare the difference between Roy and Hasek vs the average goalie, shouldn't you compare the difference between Gretzky and Stastny vs the average top line center?

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 01:03 PM
  #97
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by InfinityIggy View Post
No thats obviously not what I am saying, I am saying it should be "shockingly" more, just like Gretzky's. So if the next highest was say... .920, .923, .925, then if his was say, .955 then I would call that a "shocking" difference.
Pretend you live in a world where a .915 sustained over several years is considered absolutely elite, legendary, Hall of Fame quality goaltending.

Now one guy, and only one, comes along and drops a .930 over a six year span. There you are, watching the game thinking that the HOF goalie with a .915 is the bees knees compared to the average .900 goalie. Next thing you know, that HOF goalie is sitting there with his measly .915 against a guy who is money in the bank for a .930.

Trust me, and anyone else who lived it, that IS shocking.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 01:04 PM
  #98
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
If you're going to compare the difference between Roy and Hasek vs the average goalie, shouldn't you compare the difference between Gretzky and Stastny vs the average top line center?
Probably so, but how do you calculate what the average first line center scores?

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 01:07 PM
  #99
OneMoreAstronaut
Reduce chainsaw size
 
OneMoreAstronaut's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,503
vCash: 50
Here's my one issue with calling Hasek a "generational" goalie. When I hear the term "generational" (and I could absolutely just be alone in this), I think of someone who inspires the next generation by style. When I watch hockey these days, there are no baby Hasek clones coming up into the league. The only real comparable in the NHL to him right now, in terms of style, would be Thomas maybe? And given his age, you probably can't say that he was directly influenced by the less-than-10 years older Hasek. Whereas basically every goalie that comes into the league these days are positional, butterfly-type goaltenders.

Depends on your definition of generational, I guess - inspiration by skill or by style. In my mind someone like Roy fit the bill a lot more for the latter. Or maybe generational just means the best of his own generation, in which case my post doesn't contribute much.

OneMoreAstronaut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 01:08 PM
  #100
InfinityIggy
Inflammatory Poster
 
InfinityIggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,881
vCash: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Pretend you live in a world where a .915 sustained over several years is considered absolutely elite, legendary, Hall of Fame quality goaltending.

Now one guy, and only one, comes along and drops a .930 over a six year span. There you are, watching the game thinking that the HOF goalie with a .915 is the bees knees compared to the average .900 goalie. Next thing you know, that HOF goalie is sitting there with his measly .915 against a guy who is money in the bank for a .930.

Trust me, and anyone else who lived it, that IS shocking.
Maybe it is, it still pales in comparison to Gretzky/Mario's gap IMO.

InfinityIggy 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 03:56 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.