HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Round 2, Vote 3 (Stanley Cup Playoff Performers)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-13-2017, 09:32 AM
  #76
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 15,106
vCash: 500
Guy Carbonneau

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
Nice work.

By my memory, Forsberg was the more consistently dominant playoff performer, and this backs that up. Sakic did have the higher spike years though, both resulting in Cups, and one of those was with Forsberg injured. A close call between these two players. For me it might come down to Sakic just not getting it done against Dallas in those two seven-game losses in 1999 and 2000. The performance against New Jersey the next year certainly has redeeming quality though.
Guy Carbonneau a RHS center was with Dallas in 1999 and 2000. Wonder who he covered in the playoffs? Value of a defensive center in the playoffs demonstrated again.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 09:34 AM
  #77
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Guy Carbonneau a RHS center was with Dallas in 1999 and 2000. Wonder who he covered in the playoffs? Value of a defensive center in the playoffs demonstrated again.
...but he covered Forsberg, who performed better. Sakic went against Modano.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Augusta Chronicle, May 28, 1999
Derian Hatcher, a rugged defenseman with stubble that would demand a sharp razor, has drawn the arduous task of shadowing high-scoring, hard-hitting center Peter Forsberg.

The early results couldn't be better for the Dallas Stars, who have effectively contained Forsberg and Colorado's potent offense to take a 2-1 series lead over the Avalanche in the Western Conference finals.

"Whether I wanted the assignment or not, I got it," Hatcher said Thursday. "I would rather play against the other lines. ... He is one of the harder guys in the league to defend. He is so strong on his skates. You can't knock him down."

Hatcher's work in Dallas' 3-0 victory Wednesday night followed two games of grinding by teammate Guy Carbonneau, who actually asked to go head-to-head with Forsberg in the first two games.

quoipourquoi is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 10:24 AM
  #78
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 15,106
vCash: 500
Frank Nighbor

Start our look at Frank Nighbor with comments from Howie Morenz and Frank Selke Sr:

http://ottawahockeylegends.blogspot....k-nighbor.html

1927 Playoffs :

http://bigmouthsports.com/wp-content...scores-OTT.pdf

Lead center on a team that held Howie Morenz and Eddie Shore scoreless,over a total of six playoff games.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 10:30 AM
  #79
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 15,106
vCash: 500
Nice But.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
...but he covered Forsberg, who performed better. Sakic went against Modano.
Nice narrative but check the boxscores, especially game one where it is rather clear that the Forsberg Line was matched against the Modano Line in a 2-1 Colorado victory.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/boxs...905220DAL.html

Never trust a reporter that uses the word shadowing or shadow or a derivative.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 10:44 AM
  #80
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hôlle
Posts: 34,890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
I think what Richard brought to the table has more value in a playoff series than it does over the course of the regular season. Winning a playoff series is a different animal. Match-ups, strategy, circumstances...all that stuff evolves over the course of up to seven games against the same opponent. It would seem that no matter the conditions presented, Richard adapted and excelled.
But then again... this is probably exactly why Richard is seen like he's seen as an overall player. I mean... He was ALWAYS like that, and it's not like Richard was the only player who could adapt.

MXD is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 10:45 AM
  #81
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Nice narrative but check the boxscores, especially game one where it is rather clear that the Forsberg Line was matched against the Modano Line in a 2-1 Colorado victory.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/boxs...905220DAL.html

Never trust a reporter that uses the word shadowing or shadow or a derivative.
I could trust Modano and Carbonneau though. Carbonneau took over the assignment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denver Post, May 25
"We put the grinders with Forsberg and tried to get him off his game a little bit,'' said Stars center Mike Modano, who had gone against Forsberg during Game 1. "Those guys are mentally tough ... I think it was a great challenge for Carbonneau's line.''

Carbonneau was with wingers Mike Keane and Blake Sloan, and the only production for the Forsberg-Claude Lemieux-Valeri Kamensky line was on a Colorado power play, when Lemieux and Forsberg got assists on Sandis Ozolinsh's goal.

"I think it freed up Modano's line to play against somebody else,'' Carbonneau said of the matchup change. "Obviously, when you have a line like Forsberg has, it's tough. Defensively, they're awesome and they don't need that many chances to score goals.''

Carbonneau's point was that once Modano was away from having to check Forsberg, who plays a far more physical game than Joe Sakic, Modano could open up his game a bit.

"Mo has been doing a good job all year,'' Carbonneau said. "But obviously, in the last four or five games, we've needed more goals.''

Carbonneau didn't make much of the slashes he and Forsberg took at each other. "Just the heat of the battle,'' he said, shrugging.

quoipourquoi is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 10:48 AM
  #82
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hôlle
Posts: 34,890
vCash: 500
And I'd add... A very old Carbonneau, too.

MXD is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 10:51 AM
  #83
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 15,106
vCash: 500
Time on Ice

Perhaps in a limited fashion. TOI does not reflect this given > 21:00 for Forsberg vs > 14:00 for Carbonneau. also the 32 to 24 edge in shifts. Facror in Carbonneau playing on the PK as well.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 10:54 AM
  #84
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
And I'd add... A very old Carbonneau, too.
Matvichuk and Hatcher and Carbonneau isn't the easiest matchup - at least relative to what else Dallas had. But looking at Game 1 where Forsberg performed better against Modano's line than Sakic would go on to do for the rest of the 1999 and 2000 Conference Finals and assuming that the Carbonneau/Sakic continued and thus explained Sakic's statistics vs. Dallas would be inaccurate.

quoipourquoi is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 01:18 PM
  #85
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
SV% is no longer taken as a serious indicator of goalie reliability on these boards. South of basic +/- and sinking fast.
SV% is by no means infallible but claiming it's not taken seriously at all is very convenient. Let's throw the SV% stat right out the window because it disproves your whole post.

If you disagree with the fact that Roy, Giguere, and Roloson completely outplayed the Detroit goalies then you clearly didn't watch those series. There isn't an argument to be made here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Many teams, short list follows, - Chicago with Alf Moore in 1938, Toronto with Frank McCool in 1945,Montreal with McNeil/Plante in 1953,Toronto with Don Simmons in 1962, Detroit with Robert Champoux in 1964, Philly with Wayne Stephenson in 1976 and Michael Leighton in 2010, Buffalo with Roloson in 1999 have overcome goaltending circumstances or injuries(game(s) or series) to goaltenders to win the SC or at least go to the finals. Teams come together and compensate. Thank you for showing that teams with Lidstrom could not come together and compensate while a team with Pronger - Philly with Leighton in 2010 did a much better job of compensating. While teams with Siebert, Harvey,Horton/Stanley, Ted Kennedy, 1976 Flyers with Clarke and a generic defence managed to overcome such obstacles.

After all 1999 Buffalo could not match the 1999 Red Wings defence but they overcame the .851 SV% of Dwayne Roloson - not the best indicator but playing by your standards, to make the finals allowing Hasek to come back.
So you have semi-examples in 1999 and 2010. In '10 the Flyers received .913 SV% from their goalies so it wasn't that bad. You've just admitted those are the exceptions to the rule in the modern era so thanks for that.

Let's look at the Cup Winners from 1995 to 2002. Goalies included Brodeur, Roy, Belfour, Vernon, Osgood, and 37 year old Hasek. Which two of these guys don't quite belong?? The fact is that only the Red Wings could win it all during that span without an elite goalie. That shows the strength of the skaters on the Red Wings and their top defender.

Go through all the SV% of the Cup winning teams during the playoffs since the early 90's. They needed very good to great goaltending to win. We're all hockey fans here and follow the NHL so this should not be news to anyone. I'd list the numbers but I don't have time. If someone else wants to feel free. No one was winning with sub .900 SV% goaltending and typically it was above .920 over the course of the playoffs.

danincanada is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 01:46 PM
  #86
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
If we're going to be discussing him as the potential top playoff performer of his era (I would suggest it is Forsberg) and the largest driver of Detroit's success, then shouldn't his performances compensate for those of his goaltenders against teams like Los Angeles, Edmonton, Calgary, and Anaheim? He is a defensive defenseman, after all. If he isn't compensating for goaltending mismatches through stellar defense (while Detroit has the stronger forward lines) and needs his goaltenders to have good-to-great performances, then I'm not seeing his role as the team's most essential element. A very good element, but one secondary to his own goaltender (whomever that may be) on one end of the ice and secondary to the outstanding forward depth on the other end of the ice.

In other words... very rarely do I feel he was the fulcrum in a series, swinging it to Detroit from another team. He'd score his timely long bombs - which more often came against teams they were heavily favored against - and that's fantastic. But if he's not scoring someone to death and he's not making up for the gap between Felix Potvin and Chris Osgood or Dwayne Roloson and Manny Legace or JS Giguere and Curtis Joseph or Miikka Kiprusoff and Curtis Joseph, then I think his importance as an individual might be overstated by his early eligibility.
This is about comparing whole playoff careers, correct? If that's the case there is no case whatsoever for Forsberg over Lidstrom. I don't know how you can argue that considering their whole playoff careers.

Detroit was one of the rare exceptions to the rule that you needed elite goaltending to win in the playoffs. This was, in large part anyways, due to Lidstrom. He did often help compensate for their lack of elite goaltending but goaltending is extremely important come playoff time. If you don't at least get strong goaltending you're going nowhere and if you run into a Roy or '03 Giguere you may not win the series no matter how much you dominate the puck and out shoot your opposition. Lidstrom, and his 11 game winning playoff goals, sure has some unusually high standards to meet for some.

While we're at it, what exactly did Forsberg and/or Sakic accomplish in the playoffs without Roy?

danincanada is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 01:57 PM
  #87
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
Let's look at the Cup Winners from 1995 to 2002. Goalies included Brodeur, Roy, Belfour, Vernon, Osgood, and 37 year old Hasek. Which two of these guys don't quite belong?? The fact is that only the Red Wings could win it all during that span without an elite goalie. That shows the strength of the skaters on the Red Wings and their top defender.
But in the last thread, we saw that in Detroit's Stanley Cups, they did receive good goaltending. Some have marquee names, but if we blindly threw out the save percentages for those 1995-2002 Stanley Cup winners, would we be able to tell who is who?

.918, .920, .921, .927, .927, .927, .930, .934

Obviously a terrible use of raw save percentage, but you get my point, right? The names don't necessarily make it harder (sometimes Roloson plays like 1999, sometimes like 2006). And obviously Chris Osgood in 2008 and 2009 was lights out in Lidstrom's other deep runs. That Detroit came close to winning with Mike Vernon in 1995 is to their credit. Paul Coffey is eligible in this round too.

quoipourquoi is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 02:57 PM
  #88
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
But in the last thread, we saw that in Detroit's Stanley Cups, they did receive good goaltending. Some have marquee names, but if we blindly threw out the save percentages for those 1995-2002 Stanley Cup winners, would we be able to tell who is who?

.918, .920, .921, .927, .927, .927, .930, .934

Obviously a terrible use of raw save percentage, but you get my point, right? The names don't necessarily make it harder (sometimes Roloson plays like 1999, sometimes like 2006). And obviously Chris Osgood in 2008 and 2009 was lights out in Lidstrom's other deep runs. That Detroit came close to winning with Mike Vernon in 1995 is to their credit. Paul Coffey is eligible in this round too.
Again, every team needs strong goaltending to succeed in the playoffs. This is old news, and of course the Red Wings received good to great goaltending when they won Cups. Show me the last time a team did win with mediocre to bad goaltending.

What Detroit did was unique in the late 90's because they won without one of those marquee elite goalies and they did it twice. You know this and aren't you a "goalie guy" who agrees with me that goaltenders typically have the largest impact? This isn't something that should be held against Lidstrom at all.

You seem perfectly fine with Forsberg/Sakic only having playoff success with Roy in their net. Imagine Roy didn't go to Colorado? Do they win anything with Fiset or Thibault as their starter? Roy was a huge difference maker and the main reason that relatively young team didn't struggle like the early 90's Red Wings did. This is both agreeing Roy was an ultimate playoff performer and showing Lidstrom was, too. Sakic and Forsberg were great players but they were also very fortunate to have a superstar difference maker in net because their playoff track record would be very different without him. The Red Wings didn't have that and had to find other ways and hope for the best with regards to goaltending.

danincanada is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 03:34 PM
  #89
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hôlle
Posts: 34,890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
again, every team needs strong goaltending to succeed in the playoffs. This is old news, and of course the red wings received good to great goaltending when they won cups. Show me the last time a team did win with mediocre to bad goaltending.

.
2014.

MXD is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 03:35 PM
  #90
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hôlle
Posts: 34,890
vCash: 500
Lidstrom's offense alone is probably good enough to warrant some (admittedly) fringe support at this point, no?

MXD is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 03:43 PM
  #91
Mike Farkas
Grace Personified
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,296
vCash: 500
Mediocre goaltending: add 2010 (Niemi), 2011 (Thomas)

Mike Farkas is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 04:27 PM
  #92
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,926
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
Lidstrom's offense alone is probably good enough to warrant some (admittedly) fringe support at this point, no?
He looks shockingly good on that playoff VsX chart posted earlier.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now  
Old
04-13-2017, 04:27 PM
  #93
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
Mediocre goaltending: add 2010 (Niemi), 2011 (Thomas)
I'm trying to remember - do I take a shot, or finish my drink.

quoipourquoi is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 05:05 PM
  #94
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 12,321
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
Mediocre goaltending: add 2010 (Niemi), 2011 (Thomas)
Your version of the trap?

I won't be the one to bite.

Dennis Bonvie is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 05:10 PM
  #95
Mike Farkas
Grace Personified
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
I'm trying to remember - do I take a shot, or finish my drink.
I fancy myself as a liquor drinker ("clearly!"), so by all means, take the shot...

Disclaimer:
And to be fair, I wasn't bringing that up to draw ire or create "gasps"...we've been down this road 100 times with me, I've made my case: tactically and with goal/timing/quality breakdowns both statistically and with video. If you don't see the game the same way I do, that's perfectly fine...I do legitimately stand by my position though, but will not go down that road in this thread, even if provoked.

Mike Farkas is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 05:36 PM
  #96
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 12,321
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
I fancy myself as a liquor drinker ("clearly!"), so by all means, take the shot...

Disclaimer:
And to be fair, I wasn't bringing that up to draw ire or create "gasps"...we've been down this road 100 times with me, I've made my case: tactically and with goal/timing/quality breakdowns both statistically and with video. If you don't see the game the same way I do, that's perfectly fine...I do legitimately stand by my position though, but will not go down that road in this thread, even if provoked.
We should wait until Thomas comes up for vote.

Dennis Bonvie is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 09:40 PM
  #97
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,550
vCash: 500
Based on error rate vs. expectation, Niemi (2010) and Quick (2014) were the least impressive performances to win the Stanley Cup since 1984 at 95.17% and 98.35% respectively - allowing marginally fewer than what the average goaltender would be expected to allow.

Detroit won with:

1997 - Mike Vernon, 70.99%
1998 - Chris Osgood, 77.59%
2002 - Dominik Hasek, 81.36%
2008 - Chris Osgood, 67.98%

quoipourquoi is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 10:24 PM
  #98
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 15,106
vCash: 500
Please

Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
But then again... this is probably exactly why Richard is seen like he's seen as an overall player. I mean... He was ALWAYS like that, and it's not like Richard was the only player who could adapt.
Please show actual evidence of this assertion about Henri Richard. If he was always at his playoff level then the NHL would have had its first 100 point player ´Henri Richard around 1960.

Also show evidence of other players adapting at the same level and as often as Henri Richard. Keon could adapt to bigger less mobile players like Esposito and Beliveau in 1967, earning a Conn Smythe but Richard adapted against all types of players - Howe, Hull, Orr, Ratelle, Clarke, just to start the list.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 10:41 PM
  #99
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 15,106
vCash: 500
Save Percentage

Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
SV% is by no means infallible but claiming it's not taken seriously at all is very convenient. Let's throw the SV% stat right out the window because it disproves your whole post.

If you disagree with the fact that Roy, Giguere, and Roloson completely outplayed the Detroit goalies then you clearly didn't watch those series. There isn't an argument to be made here.



So you have semi-examples in 1999 and 2010. In '10 the Flyers received .913 SV% from their goalies so it wasn't that bad. You've just admitted those are the exceptions to the rule in the modern era so thanks for that.

Let's look at the Cup Winners from 1995 to 2002. Goalies included Brodeur, Roy, Belfour, Vernon, Osgood, and 37 year old Hasek. Which two of these guys don't quite belong?? The fact is that only the Red Wings could win it all during that span without an elite goalie. That shows the strength of the skaters on the Red Wings and their top defender.

Go through all the SV% of the Cup winning teams during the playoffs since the early 90's. They needed very good to great goaltending to win. We're all hockey fans here and follow the NHL so this should not be news to anyone. I'd list the numbers but I don't have time. If someone else wants to feel free. No one was winning with sub .900 SV% goaltending and typically it was above .920 over the course of the playoffs.
SV% being selective. Global SV% by the Flyers goaltenders in 2010 had little to do with their success. If they kept the opposition from crashing the net they stood a chance. Against Chicago, Pronger could not keep Byfuglien and the larger Chicago forwards from crashing the net so the Flyers goaltending was exposed.

Basic situation with the Wings in the series listed was that they could not adapt to the circumstances of the series, the offence that the opposition was throwing at them. Which brings us back to the team protecting their goaltender.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
04-13-2017, 10:44 PM
  #100
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 15,106
vCash: 500
Penguins

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
But in the last thread, we saw that in Detroit's Stanley Cups, they did receive good goaltending. Some have marquee names, but if we blindly threw out the save percentages for those 1995-2002 Stanley Cup winners, would we be able to tell who is who?

.918, .920, .921, .927, .927, .927, .930, .934

Obviously a terrible use of raw save percentage, but you get my point, right? The names don't necessarily make it harder (sometimes Roloson plays like 1999, sometimes like 2006). And obviously Chris Osgood in 2008 and 2009 was lights out in Lidstrom's other deep runs. That Detroit came close to winning with Mike Vernon in 1995 is to their credit. Paul Coffey is eligible in this round too.
And did the Penguins crash the net in the 2008 and 2009 finals?

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Closed Thread

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 11:48 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.